Military theorists .vs. Actual Generals

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

Your thoughts? I always find Military theorists who never fought a battle with less weight then Actual generals who actually fought a battle.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Liddell Hart had a major impact on how WWII was fought on the ground in Europe. Considering he only saw a few weeks action during WWI, I'd say that qualifies him as a theorist. And a pretty good one, IMHO.

[MAJR]

Liddell Hart had a major impact on how WWII was fought on the ground in Europe. Considering he only saw a few weeks action during WWI, I'd say that qualifies him as a theorist. And a pretty good one, IMHO.

Now you have to be careful with Basil Liddell Hart because he claimed a lot of credit for the creation of the Britzkrieg/mobile warfare but there is debate as to whether he distorted things to give the impression he was deserving of that credit. Historians such as Shimon Naveh have suggested that he impossed upon the events and battles of the war his ideas and that he combined the maneuveres into a doctrine that didn't actually exist in reality and credited its authors as himself and Guderian. Guderian, however, made no mention of any influence in his theories from Liddell Hart in the original German editions of his memoirs but when they were being translated into English Liddell Hart sent a letter to Guderian asking him to add a paragraph that gave him credit for the German's tactical operational method in 1940 - which Guderian did - before that Guderian had never credited Liddell Hart with having any influence in his theories.

[gaelic cowboy]

Your thoughts? I always find Military theorists who never fought a battle with less weight then Actual generals who actually fought a battle.

I would have thought that Generals would have learned a hell of a lot of theory before they became generals. Your statement is a bit wooly to be honest, who are these theorists you place no weight in, have you any names we could compare with.

I dont doubt there have been plenty theorists who were not worth the paper they printed there plans on, however there have been twice as many actual generals who were not worth the uniform they wore, chiefly this is cos they failed the ultimate test which is battle.

[PanzerJaeger]

I don't understand the question. It is like saying: "The tires versus the steering wheel, which is better to have on a car?" Military effectiveness necessitates both theory and practitioners. On what basis are we to compare them?

[fenir]

ok, nm, i changed my mind.

fenir

[Samurai Waki]

Military Theorists and Generals tend to be one in the same. Prime example: Heinz Guderian.

Cheers!