Skip to main content

Principles of War: Concentration, part 1

 


“I git thar fustest with the mostest.” - attributed to Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest

“For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them.” – The Lord Jesus Christ, Matthew 18:20

General Forrest was neither a West Pointer nor a War College graduate, but he knew the principles of war, and he knew how to apply them. Although it is doubtful that he used the double superlatives in the above quotation, the statement does emphasize several truths. In this one short sentence we find four principles of war, and others are implied:

Git—offensive; thar—objective; fustest—mobility; mostest—concentration. The one word “mostest” leads us to the subject of this chapter: concentration.

Neither Alexander the Great nor Julius Caesar could have conquered the then known world if he had neglected concentration.

Occasionally in the history of warfare a new meth­od comes to light that seems so effective or is such a surprise to the enemy that its users are strongly tempted to depend upon the new method (which is temporary) and forget the basic principles of war.

This tendency was evident when the airplane made its advent on the Western Front in World War I. It glamorized the war; men became air aces and heroes. The use of the airplane did not, how­ever, have much effect on the final outcome, for no one used it in concentration. Major General Claire Chennault, when a young Army Air Corps aviator, noted this lack of application of principle. In his Way of a Fighter, he wrote, “For four months we flew and fought all over the Texas sky in the fashion of the Western Front fly­ing long patrols in formation, looking for a fight, and then scattering in a dive on the enemy into individual dogfights. As sport it was superb, but as war, even then, it seemed all wrong to me. There was too much of an air of medieval jousting in the dogfights and not enough of the calculat­ed massing of overwhelming force so necessary in the cold, cruel business of war. There were no sound military precepts that encouraged the dispersion of forces and firepower that occurred in dogfighting” (Maj. Gen. Claire Lee Chennault, Way of a Fighter, ed. Robert Hotz [New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1949], 11).

This failure to apply the principle of concentra­tion continued through the Spanish Civil War and into World War II. Chennault himself put an end to these individual tactics with his American Volunteer Group, better known as the Flying Tigers. When he went to Burma and China, his pilots stuck together. Outnumbered in the air and on the ground, in planes, pilots, and parts, they destroyed 217 enemy planes and probably forty-three more with a maximum of twenty operational P-40s in thirty-one encounters. Chennault’s losses were six pilots and sixteen planes.

In order to accomplish this, Chennault used con­centration. He simply had two aircraft firing at one enemy aircraft. Even if outnumbered in the air ten to one, Chennault’s two always outnumbered the enemy’s one. If each Flying Tiger had taken on ten of the enemy, probably we would not remember the Flying Tigers today.

In 1956, while on the staff of Commander Carrier Division Five aboard the aircraft carrier Shangri-la in the western Pacific, I watched the Carrier Air Group in practice maneuvers. The F9F Cougars came down from the sky low over the waves, firing machine guns or rockets at the target simultaneously, then pulled up together to disappear into the blue. One evening I asked one of the pilots how he could fly wing on his leader and still aim at the target. It was easy, he said. He did not aim; he just flew wing. “When he shoots, I shoot.” This is concentration.

(To be continued on Monday...)


*Excerpted from Principles of War. To purchase, visit ccmbooks.org/bookstore. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Is Obedience So Hard?

There are several reasons why obedience seems hard. I will comment on some of them and then speak positively on how obedience is easy. We think: 1) Obedience is an infringement on freedom. Since we are free in Christ, and obedience is somehow contrary to that freedom, we conclude that obedience is not good. Yet we know it is good. Thus, we become confused about obedience and are not single-minded. 2) Obedience is works. We who have been justified by grace through faith are opposed to works; therefore, we are opposed to obedience. 3) We have tried to obey and have failed—frequently. Therefore, the only solution is to disobey and later confess to receive forgiveness. It is easier to be forgiven by grace than to obey by effort. 4) We confuse obedience to men with obedience to God. Although these are sometimes one and the same (see Romans 13, 1 Peter 2-3, Ephesians 5-6, Colossians 3, and Titus 2), sometimes they are not the same (see Colossians 2:20-23, Mark 7, 1 Timothy 4:1-5, a

Lifted Up

In the first thirteen verses of John 3, Nicodemus did not understand what Jesus was talking about. It was nonsense to him. When Jesus said verse fourteen to him, Nicodemus finally understood Jesus. Here it is: “Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up…” (John 3:14). The reason it made sense to Nicodemus was because he knew of the event that Jesus spoke of. People who had been bitten by a serpent could look at the bronze snake and did not die. Nicodemus knew the Bible story.   Here it is: “Then the LORD sent venomous snakes among them; they bit the people and many Israelites died. The people came to Moses and said, ‘We sinned when we spoke against the LORD and against you. Pray that the LORD will take the snakes away from us.’ So Moses prayed for the people. The LORD said to Moses, ‘Make a snake and put it up on a pole; anyone who is bitten can look at it and live.’ So Moses made a bronze snake and put it up on a pole. Then when anyo

Getting Old

This is a post for those who are getting old or considering themselves old, from 65-100. Right now, I am 91.* I will be 92 in October. I have my own house, but I cannot live in it alone because of my physical inability to move around. One of my sons lives with me. All of us will have to make some adjustments. That includes money, relatives, your own ability and willpower to stay independent, etc. My advice is if physically and financially you can live independently, you should certainly do that. If you do, you will still need to have visits from your family frequently. You need your family. Even if you don’t need them to take care of you, you need them for the fellowship. The more fellowship you have, the longer you’ll live. If you can stay independent do it, but only if friends and relatives can see you often. In my case, I can’t walk, and I can’t do much physically. So, whether I like it or not, someone else has to get me up, get me showered, and get me dressed. I am blessed to have