5/26/2023 0 Comments Three way deadlockThe retired officer and military theory author Robert Leonhard summarizes maneuver warfare theory as "preempt, dislocate, and disrupt" the enemy as alternatives to the destruction of enemy mass through attrition warfare. Infiltration tactics, conventionally or with special forces, may be used extensively to cause chaos and confusion behind enemy lines. Firepower, primarily used to destroy as many enemy forces possible in attrition warfare, is used to suppress or destroy enemy positions at breakthrough points during maneuver warfare. Instead, in maneuver warfare, the destruction of certain enemy targets, such as command and control centers, logistical bases, or fire support assets, is combined with isolation of enemy forces and the exploitation by movement of enemy weaknesses.īypassing and cutting off enemy strongpoints often results in the collapse of that strongpoint even where the physical damage is minimal, such as the Maginot Line. Maneuver warfare suggest that strategic movement can bring the defeat of an opposing force more efficiently than simply contacting and destroying enemy forces until they can no longer fight. Maneuver warfare, on the other hand, exploits firepower and attrition on key elements of opposing forces. It exploits maneuver to bring to bear firepower to destroy enemy forces. In attrition warfare, the enemy is seen as a collection of targets to be found and destroyed. Attrition warfare tends to use rigidly-centralized command structures that require little or no creativity or initiative from lower-level leadership (also called top-down or "command push" tactics).Ĭonventional warfare doctrine identifies a spectrum with attrition warfare and maneuver warfare on opposite ends. The view on attrition warfare involves moving masses of men and materiel against enemy strongpoints, with the emphasis on the destruction of the enemy's physical assets, success as measured by enemy combatants killed, equipment and infrastructure destroyed, and territory taken or occupied. ( June 2019) ( Learn how and when to remove this template message)Īlthough most battles between established armies have historically been fought based on attrition warfare strategies, many military doctrines and cultures are based on replete historical examples of maneuver warfare. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. However, advanced technology, such as the development of cavalry and mechanized vehicles, has led to an increased interest in the concepts of maneuver warfare and in its role on modern battlefields. The idea of using rapid movement to keep an enemy off balance is as old as war itself. The term "tactical maneuver" is used by maneuver warfare theorists to refer to movement by forces to gain "advantageous position relative to the enemy," as opposed to its use in the phrase "maneuver warfare." Historically, maneuver warfare was stressed by small militaries, the more cohesive, better trained, or more technologically advanced than attrition warfare counterparts. Rather than seeking victory by applying superior force and mass to achieve physical destruction, maneuver uses preemption, deception, dislocation, and disruption to destroy the enemy's will and ability to fight. Maneuver warfare, the use of initiative, originality and the unexpected, combined with a ruthless determination to succeed, seeks to avoid opponents' strengths while exploiting their weaknesses and attacking their critical vulnerabilities and is the conceptual opposite of attrition warfare. Japanese Army soldiers rush out of their armored vehicle to counter an ambush.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |