02.005 If the army is exposed to a prolonged campaign...

[waterbearer]

If the army is exposed to a prolonged campaign, the nation's resources will not suffice.


Men will wear out long before equipment. And the nation's emotional attachment will wear thin long before the men and women in its armed forces lose faith in the challenge before them.

Money is not the only resource. A nation can replace its gold long before it can replace the young men and women who dedicate themselves to the Way as expressed by their culture and their national alliegance and who give their lives in defense of that to which they dedicate their ultimate allegiance.

[Truthseeker]

If the army is exposed to a prolonged campaign, the nation's resources will not suffice.

The longer a competitive campaign continues, the more expense we will incur. I think ST is simply driving home the point about the deleterious effects of protracted operations that were discussed in verse three.

[Bushranger]

If the army is exposed to a prolonged campaign, the nation's resources will not suffice.

Returning to the fray ...

When reading this passage, my eye is drawn to the word 'exposed'. I see the operational utility of this term best described by way of a current example and comparison.

Case test, US forces in Gulf.

Recent conflict - Formulation of objective occurs early in presidential term. Build up of forces occurs over several months, with diplomacy and UN coverage providing legitimacy and protection. Execution of conquest occurs in rapid mobile series of battles and thrusts. Through all of this, army has only been exposed during battle period of a month, when it has overwhelming force on its side. Yet, over a year later, there is a draw down on other garrison forces to maintain the necessary firepower in an ongoing campaign of continuing counterinsurgency warfare. Such a drawdown is necessary because there are political dimensions to the war precluding a firepower based solution, and a moral dimension to it that precludes out and out conscription (although those whose active reserve status has been extended involuntarily might take issue with the notion that conscription per se is not occuring). This is now a protacted campaign, and the resources of the army are not sufficient.

Compare to GW1, when the limited war had a limited objective.

Lesson to be learnt, when engaging in a campaign one must ensure the resources are sufficient to the goal so that the contest may be concluded in a foreseeable time and manner. To not plan for the resolution of the conflict is to invite an open ended campaign. Such a campaign will be protracted. The issues then shift from those of simple logistics, to the will and necessity of providing the necessary means. IF one's opponent is fighting for existence, and oneself is fighting for less essential goals, only total victory will lead to total resolution. If the situation is not one which will allow for this application to occur, then either the goals must be tailored to the achievable or the campaign not entered into.

For to do so is to enter a contest with one whose only hope lies in protracted campaigns...

[pol0311]

If the army is exposed to a prolonged campaign, the nation's resources will not suffice.

Prolonged warfare is not the ideal situation. It tasks your men and your supplies. Men tired and out of supplies breeds poor morale, therfore making victory all the tougher. Get in and when the mission is complete, get out!

[maxx]

Why does this forum seek to interpret this to war!
It has such grounding in our lives today and we seek to discuss
"the nations relation to weapontry" and "Case test, US forces in Gulf"
Who in the ruddy hell cares!

If you spend your whole life fighting, those around you will slowly wear off.
I cannot interpret that any other way.

[Truthseeker]

Hey Maxx,

The beauty of the AoW is its vastness. Each passage has the power to take on several meanings. We live in a convoluted world, Maxx. Our experiences differ in the most magnificent ways. Reading a passage during one phase or experience could very well have a different meaning during another phase or experience. Where I think you may be off the mark a bit with your caustic tone is implying that only one correct interpretation exists, that being yours. What a tragic way to confine what could otherwise be very far reaching principles. You will not get all that is available to you if you view the Sun Tzu is this way. The Sun Tzu is not on rails. It soars like an eagle.

Bring yourself to a higher state without crushing others. Its unbecoming, Maxx..

[MitchB]

Naturally, the cost in energy and resources is greater the longer the attack is required to last. Again, careful preparation and calculation avoids this pitfall by indicating the most effective points of attack.

[Tao-Tzu Neix]

If war is allowed to go on for a long while, the nation's wealth wil suffer like a stream in a drought. It will run out of power. The people will suffer a thrist for wealth and will die of it. The people are powerless and the feudal lords strong with spite.

Tao-Tzu Neix

[Trinity]

If the army is exposed to a prolonged campaign, the nation's resources will not suffice.

Insure that you have the tools to get the job done. Protracted combat with China had depleted Japan's material resources. In July 1941 the West effectively halted trade with Japan. From then on, as the desperate Japanese schemed to seize the oil and mineral-rich East Indies and Southeast Asia, a Pacific war was inevitable.

[Kansuke]

If the army is exposed to a prolonged campaign, the nation's resources will not suffice.

If a war goes on for too long, there is no way to keep your country from falling into debt on account of the fact that war is very expensive. If you impoverish your nation, there will be no way to facilitate new materials, the repair of worn equipment; no plentiful food, no viable marketplace. This will destroy the popular opinion of the people; remove the money, remove the food, remove the market, and that is rebellion.

Impoverish your nation, and you'll lose the war for your enemy.

[FlamingCorndogs]

If the army is exposed to a prolonged campaign, the nation's resources will not suffice.

Because this refers to the army being exposed, I am assuming the war is being fought outside the boundaries of the nation under consideration.

Start with a thousand gold pieces per day. Whatever that means in monetary terms, the days will keep coming and going and the money will keep going out and going out until the deepest pockets empty. That's just the cost in coin from the treasury.
There's also an opportunity cost. What is spent on the war cannot be spent on vaccinations, scholarships, road repair, or internal policework.
The nation's resources include the supply of "extras," young fungible individuals whose loss might devastate their own families but not impact the nation as a whole--until enough of them are lost.
The nations resources include the goods and raw materials that are shipped to the front instead of being used to bolster health, security, and peace of mind at home.
The army needs to be given a mission it can rapidly accomplish; if the leader's goals can't be rapidly accomplished, the general must still find a way to break down the overall campaigns to bite sized pieces, so the army (and the nation behind it) can win one, take a breath, and then attack the next.

[SubRosa]

This verse brings to mind Paul Kennedy's book _The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers_. He maintains that the fall of world powers throughout history has been triggered by two common factors: Military over-extension abroad and economic contraction (recession/famine) at home.

[Saro]

As previously stated, there is expense associated with any undertaking. The longer that undertaking lasts, the more you'll have to sacrifice of whatever resources you're using. In the case of war that will be people, money and equipment, both qualitatively and quantitatively. By that I mean that not only will the amount of each of these be driven down by the war, but the quality of what you have left will begin to deteriorate as morale is driven down and equipment begins to wear down.

As I wrote earlier, though war is an act of self-preservation this aspect of it means that it will at least temporarily weaken those who wage it. The shorter the war, the more you'll preserve.

[lozen]

"If the army is exposed to a prolonged campaign, the nation's resources will not suffice."

Yet another reason to get in, do your thing and get out. Just like you want to get out of a gun fight before you run out of bullets, you want to get your army out of a prolonged campaign before you run out of resources. Pretty simple, but so often forgotten.

[Kane]

One does have a limited amount of supplies. Though in this day and age, it would take many years to deplete a nations stock of supplies. Back then, it would only take a season. Especially in winter. More supplies would be needed.