02.010 Those skilled in doing battle do not raise troops...

[sonshi]

Those skilled in doing battle do not raise troops twice, or transport provisions three times.

[markb287]

"Those skilled in doing battle do not raise troops twice, or transport provisions three times."-Sun-tzu.

Basically this means that raising troops and transporting foods and equipment takes quite amount of money, the more money the less troubles.

In my mind, I get the impression that perhaps one reason why Sun Tzu wrote: "Those skilled in doing battle do not raise troops twice. . .", he was indirectly linking this principle with his other teachings which stipulate that:

1. ' To win without fighting is the acme of skill;

2. ' A General must spend time in the Temple making calculations prior to committing his Army to battle; and,

3. 'No nation has ever benefited from protracted warfare.'

Re: #1, a wise General will train his troops and deploy them in such a way as to attack the plans of his potential adversary while the plans are still in the formative stages. Therefore, the mission is accomplished long before it ever becomes necessary to raise more troops a second or third time.

Re: #2, a wise General, who by nature is benevolent toward his troops, will always be dedicated to planning and making calculations in order to decrease the risk of harm to his Army and civilians. As a result, the time spent clarifying the mission and objectives means that it does not become necessary for the General to have to go back to the civil authority/king/President to request more troops.

Just look at the screw-ups by McNamara and Gen. Westmoreland during the build-up of US Forces in Vietnam. They kept going back to President Johnson and requesting more soldiers and all the while they did not have a detailed, unified plan to actually win the war. Although I could be wrong, I believe that Westmoreland should have been relieved of command. As it was, Johnson at least had the sense to "promote" McNamara and get him out of the Pentagon ASAP. BTW, I think McNamara self-serving book from a few years ago reeks of revisionist bullshit and was simply his way of trying to embellish his reputation for the sake of later historians. Pure trash if you ask me. (BTW, I did NOT read his book.)

Re: #3, this is self-evident.

A good example of a protracted war is the Peloponessian War fought between Athens & Sparta as the two main antagonists with numerous supporting characters. That war raged on from about 430 B.C. until around 403 B.C.

Thousands upon thousands of men drowned during storms without ever setting foot on a battlefield. Many thousands more were killed in countless battles.

Sigh.

I have no idea how many times the Spartan and Athenic leaders had to go back and raise more troops but I would imagine that they had to do so many dozens of times over 25+ years.

Sparta finally "won" but their victory contained the seeds of their eventual defeat at the hands of the Thebans. Despite their ancestory, the modern day Greeks, much like the Italians, cann't fight worth shit. Go figure. I don't think the Greeks ever recovered from Lysistrata.

I have the Penguin edition of the History of the Peloponessian War translated by Paret. The original author, Thucydides, wrote an amazing book and the speeches captured in his book are worth examining if one wants to gain insight into human nature.

Anyway, I was in a bookstore recently and I saw that there apparently is a new translation of Thucydides' History of the Peloponessian War and it looks like it might be a classic. I only spent a few minutes leafing through it but it has some great maps and lucid explanations of numerous battles.

Peace.

-BingFa

Originally posted by sonshi
Those skilled in doing battle do not raise troops twice, or transport provisions three times.

The wise strategic leader does it right the first time.

No waste of movement.

"In planning, never a useless move, in strategy, no step is taken in vain." Ch'en Hao

[gonzo]

If you don't know what you are doing or are unskilled, you may need to perform the same tasks more than once.

Gonzo

[MonteChristo]

You should aim at achieving things at the very first attempt. This is not only wise but resource and time efficient. I have seen people, who at the first sight are slow. They do not make a lot of noise and they are quiet. They do not make promises, which they cannot keep. But they do planning carefully. And this allows them to obtain the desired results with minimal involvement and least energy consumed.

[HALBLEU]

The Supreme Strategist General (SSG) knows that a well-planned, well-prepared and well-trained army is the key to a short and effective campaign. ... He remembers this quote from Chen Hao "In Planning, Never A Useless Move. In Strategy, No Step Is Taken Vain".

Sun Tzu said, "Those skilled in doing battle do not raise troops twice, or transport provisions three times."

If you do "the right thing right" the first time, you won't need to try to do it right a second time.

"Those skilled in doing battle do not raise troops twice, or transport provisions three times. "

when you have a good battleplan, its application will be fast and clear...... a chinese Blitzkrieg

[Dan]

Those skilled in doing battle do not raise troops twice, or transport provisions three times.

If you're skilled in the Art of War, you should have won on the first attack with the initial amount of men and materials. Otherwise, you didn't plan properly and were overconfident, and now you pay the price, which is more men and more materials.

[dej2]

Those skilled in doing battle do not raise troops twice, or transport provisions three times.
Sawyer’s Translation
“One who excels in employing the military does not conscript the people twice or transport provisions a third time.”

Once plans are made and calculations done, the amount of soldiers, supplies, equipment and what ever is necessary for the campaign should have been in this estimation. If for any reason you need to raise more troops, or collect more supplies or equipment other than that was calculated in the original estimation, then you have not done your homework! You have failed in the estimation of this campaign and have put an excessive burden onto the state. Depending on the severity, the state may never be able to recover from such a mistake.

Again I feel the text speaks only to experts in the "art of war philosophy". I feel that the message is do not start battles with which you are ill prepared to deal with the consequences of defeat.....Really, just who is that smart. I have never met a person who could make such sophistated projections and analysis of battles yet to be fought. The message must be to the average person: "do not engage in battles period."

This does not help me when I get a late charge on a movie rental which I think is unfair. I am looking for some kind of practical application of this philosophy that I could replicate in a rather ordinary life.
Maybe my calculations on the movie rental are wrong since I am unprepared to take the movie rental place to court.. maybe I should concentrate on battles I can win...Like adequately planning an evening of relaxation and changing where I rent my movies.

I guess just because I don't like the logic of the Sun Tzu when it is right and I am wrong. Simple Logic difficult in application. I tend to dislike rules even when they make sense. I do like this venting. I do wonder if I will ever be able to apply this logic.

In my own case I would think that due to multiple conflicts. Most of which go poorly and like a nation ultimately weakens it's power. I have been weakened by multiple battles. To stop fighting would be a reasonable conclusion although I feel quite addicted to the constant drama of repetive mobilizations not victory. A drama addiction...who would have thought.

Sincerely,

Pawn11

[Bagration]

Hello,

I'm a new guy so excuse any blatent stupidity or ignorance

Even the best plans rely on your opponent, so surely the most crucial aspect of strategy is the correct application of intelligence

[UV]

Bagration, Welcome to Sonshi.com!!

My thoughts regarding your point are that "it depends". For example, even if intelligence is top-notch, something like weak logistics can result in defeat. Remember Murphy's Laws.

[UV]

Originally posted by sonshi
Those skilled in doing battle do not raise troops twice, or transport provisions three times.

This means "do it right the first time."

Having to redo something because of haphazard planning or because of "cutting corners" increases cost by more than twice. Cost is measured in such areas as lost victory opportunities, money and weakened morale.