From earlier association with the enemy, from intelligence of his
peacetime preparations, and from a knowledge of his political and
military history, his broad current policies are generally matters of
common report. The motives impelling the enemy to action may thus be
evident. Past or present tendencies of the enemy, along certain
specific lines of endeavor, may be known. These may be corroborated by
the enemy action which has recently occurred.
In military undertakings of major scope the objectives of the enemy
are often difficult of concealment. A survey of the objectives which
the enemy has been pursuing may allow a reasoned opinion to be formed
as to the enemy's immediate objectives,--whether, at least, his future
action will be offensive or defensive. The importance to be attached
by the enemy to certain physical objectives may be indicated by the
broad aims known to exist. Present composition and disposition of the
enemy's forces may betray the effort which he intends. Circumstances,
clearly disadvantageous to the commander's forces, may disclose what
his enemy's aim may be for maintaining or creating a favorable (enemy)
military situation.
However scant or incomplete the data from such sources or from others,
the commander seeks to gain, by piecing together, a composite basis of
workable value in arriving at a sound conclusion as to the enemy's
future action.
The enemy objective thus visualized may serve as the purpose of the
enemy's mission. The situation thus envisaged may be specific or broad
in nature, depending on the soundness of the deductions. This, in
turn, will depend on the extent and character of the information
available.
It may now be possible to deduce a definite task, which when
accomplished, will attain the indicated purpose. However, as
previously stated, it is not desirable to be unduly specific. The
commander reflects on the several possibilities which if carried out
will attain the purpose. By being inclusive instead of restrictive in
this matter, he avoids the danger of overlooking enemy capabilities.
Moreover, the information available will not always justify the
derivation of a specific task.
By this process of reasoning, the commander may arrive at a studied
opinion as to the enemy's appropriate effect desired. The commander's
safeguard is that he has not been too restrictive or specific. He
expects to encompass within his conclusion the limits of the enemy's
objectives and actions, so that his own planned action will not fail
to cover all enemy action which can materially influence the
situation.
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