[Dragaera] Sethra Lavode's Words on War

[Ken Koester]

Maximilian Wilson wrote:

>On Feb 10, 2008 6:25 PM, Jon Lincicum <lincicum at comcast.net> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>It tends to imply that culpability for the war lies entirely with the
>>defender...when in fact, the aggressor is at least as culpable. Just
>>because it's technically true that the defender has the *option* to roll
>>over and accept defeat without a fight, it can be stated they are
>>ultimately responsible for the state of war... Without the aggressor,
>>there is no need for the defender to have to make that choice.
>>
>>    
>>
I don't buy this interpretation.  It is true that if the defender 
chooses not to fight, fighting is minimal.  It does not follow that the 
defender is responsible for the fighting that follows if the defender 
resists.

>
>Having not read Clausewitz, my take on Sethra's words was that she was
>discussing tactics, not culpability. The defender has the initiative
>because he/she can choose where the fighting starts and on what terms.
>
>  
>
In general. . . no.  The defender can do whatever he likes, but the 
attacker determines where the fighting is going to be.  The Japanese 
determined that fighting would start at Pearl Harbor, the Philippines & 
a host of other places, some not defended at all (in effect).  Defender 
preparations merely determined how many attackers would be involved & to 
some extent the timing of the attacks.  At the same time, other places 
were not attacked, even though defended.  In the German invasion of 
Poland in '39, the attackers determined there would be no fighting on 
the Vistula by choosing not to attack there, even though there were 
defenders.  And Barbarossa, Soviet preparations didn't change the 
general German axis of attack whatsoever:  the Soviets could have stuck 
units wherever they choose & the Germans would probably still have done 
the same things.

The advantage that Sethra seems to be assigning to the defense is that 
of the counterattack while the attacker is off-balance.  This is a very 
potent defender advantage, one of the most important reasons for either 
side to keep reserve forces uncommitted until the right moment to use 
them.  A successful counterattack wrests local initiative away from 
whoever was struck (but might not wrest complete initiative away 
overall); an attempted defender counterattack can itself be countered in 
the same fashion.  WWI repeated this story in weary ad inf.

Sethra also seems to be adding attacker exhaustion & logistics 
difficulties as a defender advantage; these are also potent advantages.  
But they can be overrated.

kk