In the Seven Years’ War, at least in the last three years of it,
Frederick the Great did not think of an offensive; indeed we believe
further, that generally speaking, he only acted on the offensive at any
time in this war as the best means of defending himself; his whole
situation compelled him to this course, and it is natural that a
general should aim more immediately at that which is most in accordance
with the situation in which he is placed for the time being.
Nevertheless, we cannot look at this example of a defence upon a great
scale without supposing that the idea of a possible counterstroke
against Austria lay at the bottom of the whole of it, and saying to
ourselves, the moment for that counterstroke had not arrived before the
war came to a close. The conclusion of peace shows that this idea is
not without foundation even in this instance; for what could have
actuated the Austrians to make peace except the thought that they were
not in a condition with their own forces alone to make head against the
talent of the king; that to maintain an equilibrium their exertions
must be greater than heretofore, and that the slightest relaxation of
their efforts would probably lead to fresh losses of territory. And, in
fact, who can doubt that if Russia, Sweden, and the army of the German
Empire had ceased to act together against Frederick the Great he would
have tried to conquer the Austrians again in Bohemia and Moravia?
Having thus defined the true meaning of the defensive, having defined
its boundaries, we return again to the assertion that the defensive _is
the stronger form of making war._
Upon a closer examination, and comparison of the offensive and
defensive, this will appear perfectly plain; but for the present we
shall confine ourselves to noticing the contradiction in which we
should be involved with ourselves, and with the results of experience
by maintaining the contrary to be the fact. If the offensive form was
the stronger there would be no further occasion ever to use the
defensive, as it has merely a negative object, every one would be for
attacking, and the defensive would be an absurdity. On the other hand,
it is very natural that the higher object should be purchased by
greater sacrifices. Whoever feels himself strong enough to make use of
the weaker form has it in his power to aim at the greater object;
whoever sets before himself the smaller object can only do so in order
to have the benefit of the stronger form—If we look to experience, such
a thing is unheard of as any one carrying on a war upon two different
theatres—offensively on one with the weaker army, and defensively on
the other with his strongest force But if the reverse of this has
everywhere and at all times taken place that shows plainly that
generals although their own inclination prompts them to the offensive,
still hold the defensive to be the stronger form. We have still in the
next chapters to explain some preliminary points.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account