• Welcome to the Fable Community Forum!

    We're a group of fans who are passionate about the Fable series and video gaming.

    Register Log in

Strategy

Walker

Walker

Ax-Wielding Nerd
Mar 14, 2007
2,877
383
265
34
The Free Old Line State
This amused me. I was reading a paper by a guy called Timothy Hoyt, from the US Naval War College, on the US and Maritime Strategy.

I read this line: "We base our study of strategy on five major theoretical works: Sun Tzu’s The Art of War, Carl von Clausewitz’s On War, Alfred Thayer Mahan’s The Influence of Sea Power Upon History, Sir Julian Corbett’s Some Principles of Maritime Strategy, and Mao Zedong’s On Protracted War."

Seriously. Out of the five, ONE is an American. One is German. One's a Brit. And two are Chinese. Well, ****, that's a bad sign. I guess if we ever fight China we better make sure to do it tactically. (And one of them is Mao, which is just amusing on a whole other level.)
 
TRA Rotid said:
No amount of strategy will help you against China anyway.
Click to expand...

Vietnam did pretty well fighting China. Only lost 4,000 men more then the larger PLA, but destroyed more tanks, according to western sources. If western forces were to use guerilla tactics, we could do some serious damage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War
Also:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/08/15/us-china-military-idUSTRE67E07020100815

I'd say that the west have a pretty good chance.
 
Walker said:
This amused me. I was reading a paper by a guy called Timothy Hoyt, from the US Naval War College, on the US and Maritime Strategy.

I read this line: "We base our study of strategy on five major theoretical works: Sun Tzu’s The Art of War, Carl von Clausewitz’s On War, Alfred Thayer Mahan’s The Influence of Sea Power Upon History, Sir Julian Corbett’s Some Principles of Maritime Strategy, and Mao Zedong’s On Protracted War."

Seriously. Out of the five, ONE is an American. One is German. One's a Brit. And two are Chinese. Well, s***, that's a bad sign. I guess if we ever fight China we better make sure to do it tactically. (And one of them is Mao, which is just amusing on a whole other level.)
Click to expand...

Walker, you're forgetting that America has only been around 400 years or so. War is significantly older, and those guys have had a lot longer to perfect the art of killing a lot of people.

Also, who cares? If I complained every time something wasn't Australian, then I'd be complaining a lot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hermit
The Dark Knight said:
Vietnam did pretty well fighting China. Only lost 4,000 men more then the larger PLA, but destroyed more tanks, according to western sources. If western forces were to use guerilla tactics, we could do some serious damage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War
Also:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/08/15/us-china-military-idUSTRE67E07020100815

I'd say that the west have a pretty good chance.
Click to expand...
True, but that war was a long time ago.

Guerilla warfare is the way to go, I agree, though I fear the raw mass would be simply too overwhelming. I simply wanted to say that going to war against against China would be the scariest.


Awesome Australian thing: Dundee... obviously.
 
Arseface said:
Walker, you're forgetting that America has only been around 400 years or so. War is significantly older, and those guys have had a lot longer to perfect the art of killing a lot of people.

Also, who cares? If I complained every time something wasn't Australian, then I'd be complaining a lot.
Click to expand...

I forget nothing, and I wasn't complaining... I actually think that it's cool. We've had a massive hardon for von Clausewitz forever-- including when the Germans were the Big Bad Huns. That Sir Julian Corbett dude was a British writer RIGHT around the time that the UK was transitioning from "those assholes" to "those pretty swell chaps o'er there." Sun Tzu, we've probably wanted to bone him for AT LEAST as long as von Clausewitz. Should be longer, but I doubt it for some reason. Don't actually know.

It did kind of surprise me that Mao was up there, because I didn't expect him. The others I'd never heard of or fully expected to be there (Alfred Thayer Mahan is like god to Navy eggheads, for instance) but that's more "sweet, we're eating all our enemy's knowledge" than anything else. Not that China is really our enemy, in and of itself.

Seriously, I've never been "Ewwww, foreign stuff." More "yeah! Foreign stuff! Let's steal that **** and make it our own!"

TRA Rotid said:
Guerilla warfare is the way to go, I agree, though I fear the raw mass would be simply too overwhelming. I simply wanted to say that going to war against against China would be the scariest.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. Another of the sources I just read-- the source I quoted above mentioned another source, which I tried and failed to find, but I DID find something else by the same author (who I was looking for)-- guy named Geoffrey Till, whole long article about the qualitative difference between the US and China (specifically in the maritime sphere.) Plus, hell, China STILL only has the one carrier, if that. Our maritime superiority makes us REALLY hard to attack. Sure, you can counter that with air power... but our air superiority is pretty good, too.
 
Zjuggernaut said:
Nah we're still assholes and everybody hates us.
Click to expand...

Speak fo yoself.

6260_523504326416_44504215_31179294_3298208_n.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arseface and Gikoku
Pffft. The Art of War was written when people still fought with sticks. How is that going to help you today? Humbug!

On the another topic, the British are lucky that the Americans are such douchebags on the international scene. Nobody remembers when you guys used to do likewise anymore.
 
Tsuyu said:
Pffft. The Art of War was written when people still fought with sticks. How is that going to help you today? Humbug!

On the another topic, the British are lucky that the Americans are such douchebags on the international scene. Nobody remembers when you guys used to do likewise anymore.
Click to expand...
As far as I know, it basically talks about knowing your opponent and then basing your strategy on that. When it comes to battlefield it's not, obviously, up to date anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom