, axiomatic advice that it is unwise to divide a total
force, while containing a sound element of caution, is misleading and
inadequate, for division is often necessary or desirable. To be
adequate, a maxim or rule relating to division of force should
indicate when, and in what measure, such division may or may not be
necessary or desirable. (See also page 25.)
Similarly inadequate, however true as a generality, is the statement
that the requirements of effective warfare are met by bringing
superiority to bear at the decisive time and place. Such an injunction
is of little assistance in solving practical problems as to the
appropriate degree of superiority, and as to the proper time and
place.
In like manner, any rule is faulty which advises a commander to seek
the solution of his problems by always bringing to bear his elements
of strength against the hostile elements of weakness. It may be found,
on occasion, that it is necessary or desirable to act with strength
against strength.
But it is equally faulty to maintain that action, to be effective,
seeks always to deal with the enemy by first destroying his elements
of strength. Even when the strongest opposition cannot be defeated by
direct action of this nature, success may still be possible by first
disposing of elements of weakness. When the stronger elements of a
hostile combination cannot be defeated without undue loss, yet cannot
stand without the weaker, consideration may well be given to an
apportionment of fighting strength on the basis of seeking a decision
against the latter. The defeat of a relatively small force at a
distance from the area where the main forces are concentrated in
opposition, may hasten the attainment of the ultimate objective.
The main effort, where the greater force is employed, may be identical
with the effort contributing most directly to the final result. This
identity, however, does not always exist, and the decisive influence
is frequently exerted by a relatively small force, sometimes at a
distance from the principal area of action.
Diversions (see also as to feints, page 59) are not likely to be
profitable unless constituting a sufficient threat, or unless offering
apparent advantages to the enemy which he feels that he cannot forego.
Success will attend justified diversions if they lead the enemy to
reapportion his fighting strength to meet the threat, either because
he expects repetitions (see page 73, as to raids), o
|