将军和指挥官可以命令他们的部队在正面攻击坚不可摧的阵地时被屠杀而不被追究责任。
如果詹姆斯-朗斯特里特（James Longstreet）中将负责指挥，南方部队的战争进程是否会有所不同？
为什么将军和指挥官可以命令他们的部队在正面进攻坚不可摧的阵地时被屠杀而不被追究责任？
你问的是 "可以 "这个词--他们可以，因为他们是负责人，是军队。也许你指的是 "应该 "这个词，即指挥官应该这样做吗？
有时，即使是这样，答案也是肯定的。坚不可摧的？没有什么是坚不可摧的。坚不可摧的西加波要塞很快就被日本人攻陷了。德国攻破了坚不可摧的马奇诺防线，美国在D日攻破了诺曼底坚不可摧的防线，然后是保卫德国的坚不可摧的齐格菲防线。
战争的目标是胜利。赢得越快，流血就越快停止。有时，从长远来看，重大的牺牲（如D日的入侵）可以拯救生命。你可能认为你比将军们更聪明，更有智慧。但我怀疑你的领导能力是否真的能在任何特定的战斗中带来更好的长期结果。你现在有后见之明，但在当时你不会有这种能力。"战争是残酷的，你无法提炼它"--威廉-T-谢尔曼将军。
Why can generals and commanders order their troops to be slaughtered in frontal assaults on impregnable positions and not be held accountable?
You ask the word “can” — they CAN because they are in charge and it is the military. Perhaps you meant the word “should” as in should commanders do this?
Sometimes the answer to even that is yes. Impregnable? NOTHING is impregnable. The Impregnable fortress of Sigapore fell quickly to the Japanese. Germany blew past the impregnable maginot line, America stormed the impregnable defenses of Normandy on D-Day and then the impregnable Siegfried line defending Germany.
The goal of a war is to win. The quicker the win, the quicker the bleeding stops. Sometimes a major sacrifice (like the D Day invasion) saves lives in the long run. You might think you are wiser and smarter than the Generals. but I am skeptical that your leadership skills would have really led to a better long term result in any given battle. You have hindsight now, you wouldnt have that at the time. “War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it” —General William T. Sherman.
沒有留言:
張貼留言
注意：只有此網誌的成員可以留言。