These advantages, inherent in the nature of the arm, must not be expected in dismounted action. Such action always entails5 delay and hampers7 the movements of the troops, not only by the method of operation, but also by the separation of the men from their horses. It is therefore natural that cavalry should only undertake an attack on foot when there is no prospect8 of obtaining their object by shock action, or when the latter would entail6 such sacrifice that it might imperil the further successful action of the troops.
The more, however, the disadvantageous factors of dismounted action are realised and appreciated, the[Pg 114] more, in my opinion, will endeavours be made to give it an offensive character, in order to remove as quickly as possible obstacles which hinder the free movement of the cavalry. All delay and hesitation9 are in opposition10 to the very spirit of the arm. To preserve its peculiar11 element of mobility a rapid decision is imperative12 in every situation.
Mounted, the cavalry knows only the charge and has no defensive13 power, a circumstance which strengthens its action considerably14 in carrying out its offensive principles, by relieving the leader of the onus15 of choice. On foot it is a different matter. The application of the firearm, under all tactical and topographical conditions, particularly facilitates defence and enables it to appear, to a certain extent, the stronger form of action. Herein lies the reason why defensive action is continually sought. All the more, therefore, must it be kept in view that it is the offensive on foot that the cavalry will require. To operate in combination with shock tactics to assist the offensive, and pave the way for free movement is, however, the real object of dismounted action.
It would perhaps have been better if the new Regulations had upheld this principle a little more definitely. In them, however, it is the defensive strength which cavalry has gained in dismounted action which is chiefly emphasised (390),[15] and the attack is only dealt with as a method of fighting from which the troops "need not shrink." Attention is certainly drawn[Pg 115] (455)[16] to various cases in which an attack upon foot may be undertaken. That, however, does not alter the fundamental utterance16 that the dismounted fight will chiefly be undertaken on the defensive. This interpretation17 is strengthened on reading in the directions for the action of the army cavalry during operations that "Especial additions to the force (cyclist detachments, infantry18 in wagons19, etc.) are mainly intended for the duty of strengthening local resistance, or of overcoming such resistance on the part of the enemy." The thought involuntarily occurs to the reader that in the spirit of the Regulations such additions to the force will be just as necessary in face of a serious hostile resistance, in order to free the way for the cavalry. We would, then, again find ourselves in just the same state which the war of 1870-71 proved to be so undesirable20, and the cavalry would again find the wings of its mobility clipped.
The Regulations of course only intend to convey on this point that, if such special additions to the cavalry were forthcoming, the task mentioned would be their principal duty. It is, however, a matter of significance that it is here presupposed that infantry in wagons may be detailed21 to accompany the strategic army cavalry. If it were but a matter of cyclists, that would be a quite different matter. But there cannot at present be any question of this, as there is no sufficient number of them in the army.
[Pg 116]
If the Regulations discuss these kind of possibilities I fear that the demand for infantry will very soon be heard from the army cavalry when there is any question of a serious attack on foot, and herewith the free action of the cavalry will be limited once and for all.
Military history and theoretical reflection teach us equally that the great masses of the army cavalry must under all circumstances be independent, at least for their offensive undertakings—that they cannot rely, in any case for these, on the "occasional" support of infantry. For they would thus find their mobility hampered22, and themselves tied to the very troops from which they expect support, and would then be unable to carry out those important duties which fall to their share. The army cavalry, then, can only preserve its necessary independence if it can rely upon its own strength even in an attack on foot. It must at any moment be prepared to throw all its force into the conduct of a decisive attack. This is a method of fighting from which not only should it not "shrink," but in which its dismounted r?le essentially23 consists. When an attack on foot has been determined24 on, it must, however, be first perfectly25 clear that the results will justify26 the sacrifice which such an attack, under any circumstances, must mean—that is to say, the expenditure27 not only in lives, but also in time, which must both be regarded as lost in estimating the further operative value of the force.
The new Regulations take this point of view also into consideration, but in a manner that gives cause for serious reflection. They would limit the time expended28 in an attack on foot, and during which the arm is deprived of its free mobility, and therefore demand[Pg 117] (456)[17] that, if such an attack be found necessary, endeavour must be made to carry it out with the utmost rapidity. Here is expressed a desire easy to understand. But I do not think that the object will thus be attained29 of limiting the time that a dismounted fight demands. To carry an attack rapidly through under modern conditions demands the employment of overwhelming fire power and numerical superiority.
In so far as the Regulations express the idea that an attack should only be undertaken when this superiority is assured, there is great justification for the definition laid down in paragraph 456. But the cavalry must then generally confine itself to the attack of quite weak hostile posts, for even the division contains but an insignificant30 number of rifles. But such limitations, on the other hand, in no way take into account the necessities of grave situations. The army cavalry will often find itself in a situation where a difficult attack must be carried through without any overwhelming superiority, unless it means to renounce31 the accomplishment32 of the duties entrusted33 to it.
I do not think that we should interpret the wording of the Regulations in this sense. Taken literally34, great danger lies in them—the danger, that is, of seeing in the wording of paragraph 456, a demand for the hastening of the conduct of the attack. We should thus see ourselves prevailed upon to carry out a necessary attack in a precipitate35 manner without the necessary fire preparation in order to fulfil the demand for haste. In peace man?uvres such conduct is but too often seen.[Pg 118] In war it must inevitably36 lead to defeat. Under modern conditions of weapons an attack does not allow of being accelerated by force. It must take its own time. We must not therefore deceive ourselves into thinking that voluntary acceleration37 of the offensive fight is possible, but quite clear that every decision to attack on foot signifies considerable loss in time as well as men.
After considering these circumstances it would almost seem advisable to alter the wording of paragraph 456, to make it somewhat more precise, and to eliminate the idea of acceleration of the attack. Every trooper must be conscious that from the moment he dismounts for fire action he is no longer a cavalryman38, but a foot soldier. He must follow the laws of fighting on foot, and can only reach his horse again by successful action according to these laws. Then, certainly, the dismounted troops must strive with all means in their power to reassume their mounted r?le with the utmost celerity.
The same holds good for the defence.
Cavalry will only undertake this when absolutely obliged. It may be that the conditions of force do not allow of the attack, or that the maintenance of some locality is the chief object of the fight. In the consciousness, however, that any hampering39 of initiative and free movement is opposed to the spirit of cavalry action, so must the defence—if circumstances in any way permit—be carried out with the idea of emerging as soon as possible from the defensive r?le imposed, to regain40 freedom of movement, and then to lay down the law to the enemy. This can only be attained by conducting the defence in an offensive spirit, that compels the opponent to a decision in accordance with our will.
[Pg 119]
This point of view does not, according to my thinking, receive sufficient attention in the new Regulations. Daring and initiative carry in them the seeds of great success. The cavalry should continually remember this, even in defence. On the other hand, however, it must also be ready when occasion demands to defend itself with the utmost obstinacy41 to the last man. The resolute42 defence of Sandepu by a Japanese cavalry brigade against heavy odds43 gives us a good example to follow. This action made the timely arrival of the Japanese reinforcements possible.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
mobility
|
|
| n.可动性，变动性，情感不定 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
cavalry
|
|
| n.骑兵；轻装甲部队 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
justification
|
|
| n.正当的理由；辩解的理由 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
justifiable
|
|
| adj.有理由的，无可非议的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
entails
|
|
| 使…成为必要( entail的第三人称单数 )； 需要； 限定继承； 使必需 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
entail
|
|
| vt.使承担，使成为必要，需要 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
hampers
|
|
| 妨碍，束缚，限制( hamper的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
prospect
|
|
| n.前景，前途；景色，视野 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
hesitation
|
|
| n.犹豫，踌躇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
opposition
|
|
| n.反对，敌对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
imperative
|
|
| n.命令，需要；规则；祈使语气；adj.强制的；紧急的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
defensive
|
|
| adj.防御的；防卫的；防守的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
considerably
|
|
| adv.极大地；相当大地；在很大程度上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
onus
|
|
| n.负担；责任 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
utterance
|
|
| n.用言语表达，话语，言语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
interpretation
|
|
| n.解释，说明，描述；艺术处理 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
infantry
|
|
| n.[总称]步兵(部队) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
wagons
|
|
| n.四轮的运货马车( wagon的名词复数 )；铁路货车；小手推车 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
undesirable
|
|
| adj.不受欢迎的，不良的，不合意的，讨厌的；n.不受欢迎的人，不良分子 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
detailed
|
|
| adj.详细的，详尽的，极注意细节的，完全的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
hampered
|
|
| 妨碍，束缚，限制( hamper的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
essentially
|
|
| adv.本质上，实质上，基本上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
determined
|
|
| adj.坚定的；有决心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
justify
|
|
| vt.证明…正当(或有理)，为…辩护 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
expenditure
|
|
| n.(时间、劳力、金钱等)支出；使用，消耗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
expended
|
|
| v.花费( expend的过去式和过去分词 )；使用（钱等）做某事；用光；耗尽 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
attained
|
|
| （通常经过努力）实现( attain的过去式和过去分词 )； 达到； 获得； 达到（某年龄、水平、状况） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
insignificant
|
|
| adj.无关紧要的，可忽略的，无意义的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
renounce
|
|
| v.放弃；拒绝承认，宣布与…断绝关系 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
accomplishment
|
|
| n.完成，成就，（pl.）造诣，技能 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
entrusted
|
|
| v.委托，托付( entrust的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
literally
|
|
| adv.照字面意义，逐字地；确实 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
precipitate
|
|
| adj.突如其来的；vt.使突然发生；n.沉淀物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
inevitably
|
|
| adv.不可避免地；必然发生地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
acceleration
|
|
| n.加速，加速度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
cavalryman
|
|
| 骑兵 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
hampering
|
|
| 妨碍，束缚，限制( hamper的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
regain
|
|
| vt.重新获得，收复，恢复 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
obstinacy
|
|
| n.顽固；（病痛等）难治 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
resolute
|
|
| adj.坚决的，果敢的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
odds
|
|
| n.让步，机率，可能性，比率；胜败优劣之别 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |