Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

How to understand ones enemy so that you can defea

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
d' artagnan View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar
Spawn of P,C,MA

Joined: 21-Mar-2011
Location: Summertown, TN
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 416
  Quote d' artagnan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: How to understand ones enemy so that you can defea
    Posted: 19-Apr-2012 at 14:02
The most effective way to defeat a opponent is to know your opponent so well you know what they'll do in a given situation even if the situation hasn't yet been put against them. What I think is that to have a truly beautiful victory over an enemy you must be able to deatroy that enemy so that they can never fight again and to d so one must be capable of defeating that enemy to their core. To do that yopu first have to understand that person to such a point that you know them better then they know themselves.
Hunter Johns

"We're surrounded? Good, now we can kill the bastards in any direction."
— Col. Chesty Puller | Korean War
Back to Top
Centrix Vigilis View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar

Joined: 18-Aug-2006
Location: The Llano
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7392
  Quote Centrix Vigilis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Apr-2012 at 08:47
Timely philosophy that is often overlooked or only in a cursory or insufficient fashion on occasion. But the great masters and practitioners would endorse your view.
 
To encapsulate it, if you know these and understand the fundamental importance of their application, you are well on your way to obtaining that which you elucidate.
 
 
 
 
 
 
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

S. T. Friedman


Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'

Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Apr-2012 at 11:35
Originally posted by d' artagnan

The most effective way to defeat a opponent is to know your opponent so well you know what they'll do in a given situation even if the situation hasn't yet been put against them. What I think is that to have a truly beautiful victory over an enemy you must be able to deatroy that enemy so that they can never fight again and to d so one must be capable of defeating that enemy to their core. To do that yopu first have to understand that person to such a point that you know them better then they know themselves.

That's true. The question is how ethical it is to get to know a person, or a nation, only to get then destroyed. It's is Darwinian and all, but still, I find it immoral. If we accept the view that everything is permissible, then, of course, emotional blackmail and using one's secret sufferings to push them to the wall is quite effective, but it violates both secular and Chrsitian ethics - after all, Jesus said that one is to trea others the way one want to be treated, and no one wants to be blackmailed and a position of trust to be used against them.
Back to Top
Toltec View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Shape Shifter

Joined: 12-May-2011
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1748
  Quote Toltec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Apr-2012 at 12:06
Originally posted by d' artagnan

The most effective way to defeat a opponent is to know your opponent so well you know what they'll do in a given situation even if the situation hasn't yet been put against them. What I think is that to have a truly beautiful victory over an enemy you must be able to deatroy that enemy so that they can never fight again and to d so one must be capable of defeating that enemy to their core. To do that yopu first have to understand that person to such a point that you know them better then they know themselves.
 
I would disagree, the most effective method is to take the opponent unaware............ from behind, preferably you heavily armed and him not armed........ asleep even....... or bed ridden and suffering from a terminal illness.


Edited by Toltec - 20-Apr-2012 at 12:10
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?

History Planet Website
<br /
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Apr-2012 at 20:46
This is even not ethically unacceptable, IMHO, and not even a sport.
I like a well-fit, awaken, well-fed and well-prepared enemy, in an equal duel, so I measure myself against him.
Back to Top
Centrix Vigilis View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar

Joined: 18-Aug-2006
Location: The Llano
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7392
  Quote Centrix Vigilis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Apr-2012 at 21:30
Originally posted by Don Quixote

This is even not ethically unacceptable, IMHO, and not even a sport.
I like a well-fit, awaken, well-fed and well-prepared enemy, in an equal duel, so I measure myself against him.
 
My heart agrees....
 
 
As I remain a man of some conscience... but alas it's not necessarily realistic in the accomplishment of the goal..as directed by those who do. History supports this. It is the romantics view and I cant criticize it heavily for I am one of those in part as well.
 
 
 
 
But neither romantics nor appeasement ideologies win wars once they are forced on the body politic. 
 
 
 
 
 
As warfare since the days of Ramses has not entirely been a vocation of  the individual/individual ruler and or their designated champions duelling to resolve their individual differences or accomplish their individual gains....Or as representatives of their states....that's more myth then reality. And certainly when dealing above the clan system of government. And certainly as id' in the development and practices as far as potentially 7000 years ago.
 
Matter of fact no one can actual id when transition from individual battle gave way to collective with any real accuracy.
 
To understand the transition and the practical (not moral) reasons why warfare has become a collective effort requires a lifetime of study...I'm still at it.....but even given the individual repugnance one might feel at Toltec's suggestions and comments...not only are they historically apt; but there has been much worse in the record. And they have more importantly...whether agreed with or not.. been successful.... therefore useful.
 
 
 
And in part, to x degree or other, still used.
 
The ethics and morality of warfare as a means to acquire 'whatever' have always been challenged....I have no doubt of that....but the more recent transition to and introductions of codes and rules is fairly recent in historic terms for good or bad. And I believe they are good and necessary. 
 
 
 
 
Ntl.... when one discusses this conundrum, one must always be guided by the historical cultural development of the combatants, of the specific era, and the multitude of reasons why they chose warfare as a political or personal option to gain whatever they sought....ie. context.
 
It's always context.


Edited by Centrix Vigilis - 20-Apr-2012 at 21:32
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

S. T. Friedman


Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'

Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Apr-2012 at 22:11
Realistic - no. But that doesn't really matter at this point of my life, now I value other things more than winning or survival. War, as you remark, had not been fair competition for some millenia now, so it has only negative value for me; hence, I'm long past my time of being involved in it an any direct way. If I have to be somewhere, I'll be on the field to pick up the pieces, after all is said and done, and help building what it's left from human bodies and souls.

In a fair competition it doesn't matter to me if I win or lose - "let the best man win", and if I'm not the best one in a given case - that's fine, that's just life. I like those, whether with ideas, or with bodies, in the first case it tests the viability of the idea I hold at the moment, in the second it tests my body condition, and I can pay the price for such a test. Such competitions hold value and interest to me, but war don't.


Edited by Don Quixote - 20-Apr-2012 at 22:12
Back to Top
lirelou View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 26-Mar-2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 528
  Quote lirelou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Apr-2012 at 00:40
Before you can know your opponent, you have to know yourself. And therein lies the real problem...
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Apr-2012 at 01:46
Very well said, lirelou. It's easier to get to know another person than oneself, it's easier to observe from the side, than to break one's own psychological self-defense.


Edited by Don Quixote - 21-Apr-2012 at 02:01
Back to Top
d' artagnan View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar
Spawn of P,C,MA

Joined: 21-Mar-2011
Location: Summertown, TN
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 416
  Quote d' artagnan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Apr-2012 at 16:15
Yes but previous to what i decided to quote Sun Tzu says that know yourself oryour enemy and you will win as many as you fail. Si I'm not going to disagree that it is much harder to know oneself then to know your enemy were assuming that a general who is striving to understand his enemy has first learned everything about himself. I admit that this is a bit of leap of a logic but I think it is one that is necessary for the topic.

As to the idea of a ambush being the most effective tactic. I'm not suggesting knowing your enemy as a tactic but as a strategy which I think we can all agree is a huge difference. What I'm saying is that do pull off a beautiful victory through a ambush one must first understand their enemy so that they can pull off such a ambush. For a good example look at Hannibal at Trasimene.

As to the idea of a air fight I too wish that we could be so lucky as to have such wars, but that is hopelessly unrealistic view of warfare. Warfare as we know it is as much intelligence, special ops, and shadow tactics. Its a sad truth but its the kind of world we live in and we might as well just accept this and move on.
Hunter Johns

"We're surrounded? Good, now we can kill the bastards in any direction."
— Col. Chesty Puller | Korean War
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.