Read Ebook: Tactics Volume 1 (of 2). Introduction and Formal Tactics of Infantry by Balck W William Krueger Walter Translator
Font size:
Background color:
Text color:
Add to tbrJar First Page Next Page
Ebook has 1324 lines and 283700 words, and 27 pages
ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS TRANSLATION.
INTRODUCTION.
The utopian plans for a universal international court of arbitration are chimerical and conjured up by idealists unacquainted with the harsh facts of reality, if their ideas are not, indeed--as are many proposals for disarmament--calculated to serve as a cloak for ambitious plans.
This is attained by defeating the enemy's forces, by occupying the hostile country and seizing the enemy's sources of supply, so that he will be convinced of the futility of further resistance. . Only in the rarest cases will it be necessary to continue the war until the power of resistance of the hostile state is completely destroyed. . The extent to which the enemy's power of resistance may have to be crippled or broken, in order to compel peace, depends upon his tenacity. Political considerations will also have to be taken into account in answering this question. From the military point of view, however, the purpose of every war will always be the complete overthrow of the enemy.
Precise definitions of strategy and tactics, clearly fixing the scope of each, have been vainly sought in the past. That efforts in this direction have led to no results is only natural, as tactics and strategy are complementary subjects that often encroach upon each other, while grand tactics is frequently identical with strategy.
"The art of directing armies In the theater of operations."
"The art of directing troops on the field of battle."
Strategy determines direction and objective of the movement of armies, while the manner of execution belongs to tactics.
"Strategy should devise the plan of campaign, take in with a comprehensive glance the entire probable theater of war, establish the lines of operations and direct the masses on the decisive points.
"It is the mission of the tactician to decide upon the order of march of the troops, to form them for battle at the various points determined by strategy, to begin the action, to sustain it, and to maneuver so as to attain the desired end." THIERS.
Archduke Charles considered the subordination of tactics to strategy a law. "Tactics should execute the conceptions of strategy; where the two come in conflict, where strategical considerations are opposed to tactical interests, the strategical considerations should, as a rule, take precedence. Tactics must occupy a subordinate place and attempt to neutralize existing disadvantages by skillful dispositions." Clausewitz not unjustly censures Archduke Charles for placing advantages of terrain in the first rank, and for failing to attach the proper importance to the annihilation of the hostile forces. Should the demands of strategy conflict with those of tactics on the battlefield, the latter must unquestionably take precedence, since the general's foremost thought must be the annihilation of the hostile forces. Tactical considerations should likewise govern in the selection of the direction of attack in a battle, strategical reasons for striking in this or that direction becoming effective only after the attainment of tactical success. It is true that strategy, by directing the armies and their concentration on the battlefield, provides tactics with the tools for fighting and assures the probability of victory; but, on the other hand, the commander-in-chief appropriates the fruits of each victory and makes them the basis for further plans. "The demands of strategy are silent in the presence of tactical victory; they adapt themselves to the newly created situation." Fieldmarshal MOLTKE.
The view that the direction of attack should be governed by the possibility of easy execution in minor warfare only, is held by General v. Scherff, who says: "General v. Moltke was not influenced by the question 'will the attack here or there be tactically easier or more difficult?' Only the question, 'will it there be strategically advantageous or not' was able to determine his course with reference to measures on the battlefield."
While Archduke Charles considers mathematical axioms the basis of the higher art of war, military history is for us the principal source from which to gather knowledge.
"Past events are useful to feed the imagination and furnish the memory, provided their study is the repetition of ideas that judgment should pass upon." FREDERICK THE GREAT.
"The Austrians," says Colonel Foch, "made war without understanding it; the Germans understood war without making it; but they studied it."
If the decision is to culminate in action, strength of character is required, providing the determination to execute, in spite of unavoidable difficulties, what has been recognized as proper, and also the professional ability necessary to carry out the determination to its logical conclusion. All that theory can do toward forming this character is to emphasize its importance and to refer students to military history. The applicatory method, however, can develop strength of character by compelling the student to form decisions under pressure of a specified time limit or by subjecting him to the influences of certain situations such as would be encountered in war . The means available in tactical instruction in time of peace, for the development of strength of character, are, however, very limited when compared with the great demands made by the abnormal conditions of war, so out of all proportion to those of peace. This should be thoroughly understood, lest we overestimate the value of these means as well as the results to be obtained from them in times of peace.
After theory has fulfilled its mission of clearly indicating the purpose and object of an operation, as well as the means by which it may be attained, and applicatory practice has performed its office of developing initiative and professional skill, a third factor is still necessary--the study of military history. From this fountain of knowledge both "theory" and "applicatory method" must draw their material; to this source they must again and again refer in order to guard against erroneous ideas of their own creation, which are often as different from reality as day is from night."
Viewed as the science of the leading and employment of troops, tactics may be divided into two parts:
Drill regulations are the accumulation of the tactical views and lessons of a certain period. They illustrate the tactical condition which becomes perceptible at the moment of a certain development of the fighting tools as represented by man and weapons. Man, in his peculiarities, in his weaknesses, is the constant. He constitutes the psychological element, inseparable from the science of combat, and as such is the definitely given magnitude; the effect of weapons, however, appears always as the variable factor. New weapons, therefore, necessitate new tactics.
It is a marked peculiarity of manuals of instruction, that, no matter with what far-sightedness such regulations may have been originally compiled, they become antiquated in a comparatively short time. Napoleon estimated this period at ten years. Frequent changes are certainly not desirable, if tactical development is not to be interfered with and if inconveniences are to be avoided in organizing our mobile army from our peace organizations, Reservists, and Landwehr. On the other hand, the regulations must keep abreast of requirements if the conditions to which they owe their existence have changed. In his "Military Fantasies" the Prince de Ligne wrote in 1783: "An article which should be added to all drill regulations, and which, I know not why, is omitted, is: 'Act sometimes contrary to the regulations.' It is just as necessary to teach that one must act contrary to the regulations, as to teach the disorder of troops as it will occur in action."
It is always dangerous to be behind the times, as troops thereby relinquish a superiority previously possessed over others, which knowledge they must later purchase, with streams of blood, in the face of hostile bullets. Of what avail, to the Austrians in 1866, to the Russians in 1877, were all their valiant assaults, made with tactical formations that had outlived their usefulness in the face of newer weapons, although made with the firm determination to conquer?
The self-sacrificing spirit and firmly rooted discipline of the troops found an insurmountable obstacle in the rapid fire of unshaken infantry. The war experiences of our regiments show that bullets quickly write a new tactics, demolish superannuated formations and create new ones. But at what a sacrifice! In the Franco-German war, superior leadership and a better artillery permitted us to pay this price for the lesson. But how an army fares when it lacks these auxiliaries is shown by the British experiences in South Africa. The initial failure of accustomed tactical formations causes a dread of the frontal attack and finally leads some tacticians to deny entirely even the feasibility of such an attack. In peace training, therefore, set forms are of less importance; stress should be laid on developing the faculty of adaptation to changing conditions of combat and terrain.
Further development and justification of the principles of the drill regulations, and the modification of those principles under certain assumptions, are reserved to the science of tactics. Drill regulations should not be textbooks of tactics, but, on the other hand, a textbook of tactics should deal with formations only in so far as that is necessary to ensure a clear comprehension of the fundamental principles.
"Regulations and the science of combat are in a certain sense very different subjects. The regulations are law, authority--no doubt can be entertained on this point; but that also invests them with the character of something fixed, at least for a certain space of time. They cannot be kept up to date so as to meet quickly enough the rapidly changing and ever growing demands of modern combat: that would indeed be an unfair requirement, impossible of realization. Here must enter the science of combat, which should be independent in every direction, which should know no fixed rules, and which should point to no other authority than that of truth and reality. It is not the province of the science of combat, like that of regulations, to retain that which is in keeping with prevailing views and forms; it must take into consideration the fleeting theory and practice, ever developing and changing anew."
THE FORMAL TACTICS OF INFANTRY.
In all modern armies infantry is, in virtue of its numbers and importance, the principal arm. Since the introduction of firearms, infantry has gradually increased in importance and numbers as compared with the other arms.
Infantry is as well adapted for combat with firearms as for combat with the bayonet, for attack as for defense, for action in close as in extended order. It can fight on any terrain which is at all passable, and is more independent of weather and seasons than the other arms; it surpasses the other arms in endurance, a man, on account of his will power, bearing privations and exertions better than a horse. On the other hand, the losses suffered by foot troops in action and through exertions on the march are greater than those of the mounted arms.
Percentages of cases of sickness in the campaign 1870/71:
Infantry: 69.8; Field Officers: 13.26; Captains: 10.19; Lieutenants: 3.85% Artillery: 57.7; ,, ,, 4.04; ,, 4.84; Lieutenants: 4.52,, Cavalry: 37.5; ,, ,, 5.61; ,, 2.29; Lieutenants: 3.24,,
The rate of march of infantry is so slow that in reconnaissance it can only by great exertions attain results which a small force of cavalry would obtain without appreciable effort. Infantry acting alone therefore unquestionably requires the assignment of mounted men for reconnaissance and messenger duty. As regards reconnaissance, infantry is like a man walking in the dark, who can guard against collisions only by stretching out his hand and feeling his way.
The lack of artillery support will also make itself felt when infantry encounters fire at ranges at which it is defenseless, owing to the limited range of its rifle. Infantry cannot dispense with artillery when it has to attack localities or fortified points in villages.
Since the introduction of accurate breechloading weapons, and their use by all infantry, J?gers and riflemen have no tactical excuse for existing, except where they are specially trained in mountain warfare , or where they are intended to serve as a support for cavalry divisions. . While J?ger-battalions are at present employed like the rest of the infantry, they are retained by us as such because of tradition and for reasons of organization , and an attempt is made in their tactical employment to turn their excellent marksmanship and skill in the use of ground to good account whenever possible. J?gers will be employed in defense, preferably for holding important points, and for combat and service of security on difficult terrain. Military experience has shown, however, that in actual war it was seldom possible to take advantage of these special characteristics; that in most cases the J?gers were used as other infantry, and that infantry units fighting shoulder to shoulder with J?gers accomplished as good results as the latter. Since the war of 1866 the demand for special employment of J?gers has ceased. The brief course of the campaign of 1866, in which our infantry acted mostly on the offensive, gave the J?gers an opportunity for profitable employment only where, contrary to accepted notions, they fought side by side with the rest of the infantry.
The 6th J?ger-Battalion on July 3rd at Sendrasitz; the 4th J?ger-Battalion at Podol; the 5th at Skalitz; the J?gers of the Guard at Lipa; or where during an action a reverse threw us on the defensive . The superior commanders, in attempting to assign them a special role, frequently employed them unprofitably in taking up rallying positions , sometimes even to escort baggage ; or they distributed them along the whole front for the purpose of conducting extended order fighting. When they were thus distributed among infantry organizations their efforts merged with those of the infantry.
For example, at K?niggr?tz half companies of J?gers were posted on both flanks of the Guard Infantry Division, and the 2nd J?ger-Battalion was on this day distributed by companies along the front of the entire division.
As modern fire effect makes it impossible for mounted officers to direct the firing line, it was natural to use the more improved means of communication, the telephone and telegraph, in addition to the visual signals employed by the navy.
The improvements made in weapons have had a further influence on the transformation of the infantry. Even a small force of infantry can with its magazine fire inflict annihilating losses in a very short time on closed bodies offering favorable targets, especially when this fire is delivered from a flanking position. This requires, on the one hand, that greater attention be paid during combat to local reconnaissance, which can be but imperfectly made by mounted officers with the troops, and, on the other hand, it necessitates the employment of smaller independent detachments for our own security and for harassing the enemy. Intimately connected herewith is the introduction of machine guns, possessing great mobility, which enables them to take advantage of rapidly passing moments for pouring a heavy fire on the enemy and also for reinforcing the independent cavalry in advance of the army.
In England it was decided to form mounted infantry charged with the additional duty of augmenting the fire of a cavalry division, and of furnishing the commander-in-chief with a reserve possessing the requisite mobility to permit its being thrown to any threatened point of the long battle lines of today. But of what importance is the fire of a single battalion in the large armies of the present day? The principal drawback to the employment of mounted infantry is, however, that, when mounted, it is defenseless against cavalry, and that, while in motion, it really needs a supporting force. In the Boer war the mounted infantry grew finally to a strength of 50,000 men. As it was not confronted by cavalry, it made good during the execution of wide turning movements, which Lord Roberts employed with success for the purpose of striking the flank of the Boers, who always rapidly extended their lines. In spite of these good services, it could not be denied that mounted infantry had many faults. The men knew nothing of the care of their mounts, as is evidenced by the large percentage of horses which became unserviceable. As mounted infantry units were improvised bodies, they lacked the requisite training in marching and tactical employment. After the war had lasted for some time, the mounted infantrymen, however, had completely forgotten their infantry character and deported themselves like cavalrymen, even if only as poor ones. Thus, we find toward the close of the campaign numerous attacks made by mounted infantry on the British side, as, strange to relate, also on that of the Boers.
In this experiment of creating mounted infantry, all those drawbacks which had been learned for centuries were exemplified. As an improvisation, mounted infantry disturbs the cohesion of organizations; if permanently organized, it must become cavalry, just as the dragoons became cavalry: for mounted infantry is neither flesh, fish, nor fowl and cannot endure.
The British Drill Regulations for mounted infantry lay down the following principles for its employment:
In the practical employment of mounted infantry, sight must not be lost of the fact that this arm is drilled and trained as infantry. On account of its greater mobility, it should be able to cover greater distances, and, in addition, be capable of executing wider turning movements than infantry. As a rule, mounted infantry is to be used in the following cases:
It is to perform the service of security in the immediate front of infantry divisions in conjunction with cavalry and the horse batteries assigned to the latter, in addition to augmenting the fire of the cavalry. It is further to occupy, as expeditiously as possible, tactically important positions. It is to find positions from which it can bring fire, preferably flanking fire, to bear on the flanks of hostile cavalry before the actual combat begins. It is to improve every success gained and constitute a formed nucleus in case of a retreat. Moreover, mounted infantry should enable the cavalry divisions, far in advance of the army, to devote themselves exclusively to the strategical reconnaissance with which they are charged.
In addition, the mounted infantry is to constitute a light mobile reserve which the commander-in-chief can despatch at a moment's notice from one wing to the other for the purpose of lending assistance, or for influencing the action at particular points and for which other troops are not available on account of the extraordinary extension of modern lines of battle.
Finally, mounted infantry is to fill the role of a mobile column in minor warfare or in expeditions in colonial wars, and in performing this duty assume the functions of the absent cavalry in the service of reconnaissance and patrolling.
The following is the organization and strength of mounted infantry organizations:
In war every infantry battalion is to furnish one company of mounted infantry, consisting of 5 officers, 138 men, and 144 horses; and every brigade one battalion of four companies. To each battalion of mounted infantry is assigned: one machine gun platoon, consisting of two guns and two ammunition carts . Hence the aggregate strength of a battalion of mounted infantry is: 28 officers, 630 men, and 676 horses.
The creation of mounted infantry is only proper where climatic conditions make long marches by European troops impossible, or in cases where the arrival of a few soldiers at distant points will exert a potent influence on the actions of an opponent. As shown by our experience in Southwest Africa, the proper field for mounted infantry is colonial warfare, especially when it is important to prevent the outbreak of threatened disorders and to let the country return quickly to a state of peace upon completion of the principal actions. On European theaters of war, space is lacking for the employment of mounted infantry, and, moreover, there are not enough horses. In organizing mounted infantry, an auxiliary arm, which can be of use only occasionally, has been created at the expense of infantry and cavalry. The infantry itself should endeavor to meet all demands for local reconnaissance and communication, without weakening the cavalry for its principal duties, and without, in so doing, crippling its own fighting efficiency.
For the purpose of reconnaissance, patrols or scouting detachments are used. Their usefulness in difficult country and in enterprises against the enemy's flank or rear cannot be denied. In minor operations, by advancing on side roads, they can hamper the enemy's reconnaissance, secure the flanks of their own force, ascertain the probable extent of the prospective battlefield, and, finally, having gained a firm foothold, they can become very annoying to the hostile artillery. In a large battle the necessary elbow room for such employment is lacking. To form special organizations of picked men, as is done in Russia, is always of doubtful value. An organization cannot dispense with its best men in action; it needs them as group leaders and as substitutes for disabled non-commissioned officers. While everything goes without a hitch, the withdrawal of good men from an organization is of little importance; the drawbacks to this procedure become apparent, however, when heavy losses deplete the ranks, when the line begins to waver, when, in the absence of officers, only the example of courageous men prevents the weak-kneed from running away. Our regulations properly appreciate the importance of psychological impressions during critical combat situations; they state: "The man who feels his courage and coolness going, in the excitement of battle, should look toward his officers. Should they have fallen, he will find plenty of non-commissioned officers and brave privates whose example will revive his courage." . If it becomes necessary to despatch a stronger infantry force on a mission of minor importance, it will usually be better to detail an entire company than to improvise a detachment whose leader would know his men only imperfectly. From the standpoint of training, scouting detachments have an entirely different value. They give young infantry officers, who are tied to a command, an opportunity to develop self-confidence, decision, and tactical judgment; to cope with hardships and difficulties on their own responsibility. In this manner characteristics may be developed in the young officers which will be of benefit to them in a large battle. It is obvious that scouts should be assigned bicycles to give them the mobility which infantry lacks.
If the roads are good, cyclists will frequently be able to take the place of cavalry in messenger service. In this case they remain with their organizations and perform the same duties as the other soldiers. The employment of cyclists is in accord with the principle that in war every resource the country offers for warfare should be utilized. The advantage of the use of cyclists for messenger service and their value to the command generally is obvious; they are, in addition, adapted for reconnaissance work and for reinforcing the divisional cavalry. Cyclists, however, do not lend themselves to the formation of separate organizations for battle purposes , for a large number of picked men would thereby be withdrawn from the ranks of the troops engaged. An improvised cyclist detachment would, in addition, accomplish very little, as it would lack the thorough peace training requisite for cohesive action as an organization. If the opinion is entertained that cyclist detachments could furnish substantial aid to the cavalry in advance of the army, that they could be employed profitably in the supply districts and in minor operations, and, finally, if the available material in the country is to be utilized, nothing remains but to proceed to the creation of cyclist companies in time of peace. The material necessary for repairs and for ammunition supply can only be entrusted to permanent organizations. The advantages of cyclists are their great mobility, their prompt readiness for firing, and, above all else, the noiselessness of their movements. Their weakness lies in their dependence upon a complicated machine, in the comparatively large road space taken up by them on the march , and in their dependence on the terrain. The last mentioned drawback can be remedied apparently only by the adoption of a folding wheel, but, since the cyclist's equipment cannot be secured on the machine, it is better in difficult country to push the wheels or to leave them behind under guard when necessary.
Pars. 78, 82, 86, 99, 101, 132, 151, 152, 194 and 200, GERMAN F. S. R.
In France the cyclist movement is led by Major Gerard, who rendered valuable service during a short maneuver of the cavalry division . Opinions are as yet divided as to the advisability of forming cyclist battalions. Both Major Gerard and General Langlois are advocates of their employment. General Langlois desires to oppose the brutal German battle tactics with rapid maneuvers of mobile reserves which he would form of cyclist battalions, artillery, and cavalry.
According to the Cyclist Regulations dated September 10th, 1904, the cyclist company is to be looked upon as infantry, which is capable of moving at great speed, but is tied to the network of roads. The cyclist companies are principally intended for defensive action, holding an important point until the arrival of infantry. They are also to serve as support for cavalry and artillery, but are not adapted for reconnaissance work. Since it is difficult for them to secure their flanks on the march, they are to be used mainly in combination with other arms.
Add to tbrJar First Page Next Page