america broke every rule in this chink book recently and is still winning. its outdated

>>64982278
An enemy faced with no opportunity for surrender or retreat will fight like absolute motherfuckers out of pure spite alone, or a simple desire to somehow eke out a victory against all hope.

Until the modern era most soldiers were killed during the rout. An enemy with no way out can't retreat, so you stand to lose way more men fighting them to the death. That's even if your men can do it without taking their own "outlet" after the fighting gets too tough.

Best practice is do whatever you can to stack the fight in your favor, fight the enemy until they break, then kill them as they retreat. You can't do 2 or 3 with no outlet.

>>64982285
What about Picketts charge? Why didnt they win? They were desperate to win and had to fight or die

>NOOOOO YOU CANT ENCIRCLE THE ENEMY
do chinks really?

>>64982278
Yeah, it would be a bad idea because you are pushing them to fight to the dead instead of panicking and fleeeing which is what you want.
But I can't imagine situations where you can completely surround an enemy are common at all.

>>64982305
Encirclements are the standard in modern war.

>>64982278
Number one thing you have to remember about war is that you're trying to accomplish a goal, not rack up the scorecard. Killing the enemy is typically a means to the goal rather than the goal itself. If you're trying to take a town, forcing the enemy out is much easier than killing every single defender. This means preserving more of your resources and manpower for future use while still getting what you came for. You also don't want to end up with a situation where with their backs up against the wall, a force that you could've routed is able to hold you off instead. Rare but it happens.
>>64982305
It doesn't always have to be a literal perfect perimeter. For a modern example, cutting off the MSR out of a town and leaving your enemy with only the choice of staying or retreating on foot through a hail of drone and artillery may functionally be boxing an enemy in. Even without physically taking it, effective enough fire on that road can render it functionally off-limits.
>>64982293
I think the modern equivalent would be more giving the opportunity to surrender that they don't think is just code for ending up on liveleak.

>>64982293
There is no Geneva convention back in the day.

>>64982278
Sun Tzu's guidance (and many chinese proverbs) are intended to be applied figuratively as well as literally

offering surrender terms is the most common example of this principle, anon
there are practical reasons (as well as ethical) to give the enemy quarter in modern warfare

>>64982326
They why didnt the taliban surrender? Or the VC? Or the ayatollahs?

>>64982331
didn't bomb them enough, regrettably

>>64982326
This principle is super common in modern international affairs too. When signing a deal with another country, even if you're taking them to the cleaners on something, it's good practice to give them a little win somewhere in there. Not just because they'll resent you less, but because they need to be able to spin and sell whatever deal it is to their home audience. If you play hardball, then you can end up functionally 'boxing in' someone by not giving them any room to move with their voting public or whoever else they answer to.

>>64982331
Because they have a superior will to fight

People often say that Sun Tzu's advice is too basic to be useful and that any retard would obviously know all these things.
This thread proves that wrong.

>>64982345
Im sure youll back up your silly sentence

>>64982336
How many bombs required to break a peoples will to fight?

>>64982278
>leave a way out for encircled enemy soldiers
>they can use the opportunity to run away
>you can now win more easily because they're not fighting you
vs
>leave no way out for encircled enemy soldiers
>their only hope of survival is fighting to the death in blind hope that they make it out
>your army takes more casualties than if you just let them go
>>64982293
>t. some bureaucrat's retard son who only got command of an army because the warrior class got decimated

>>64982338
>but because they need to be able to spin and sell whatever deal it is to their home audience. If you play hardball, then you can end up functionally 'boxing in' someone by not giving them any room to move with their voting public or whoever else they answer to
Good point

>>64982331
Because the surrender terms sucked ass.

>>64982280
While there are historical examples of this, there are far more examples where it isn't true at all. More often, a completely hopeless enemy will wind up with broken morale and rapidly degrade in fighting capability as its troops either surrender or try to desert and flee through gaps as individuals or small units.

>>64982278
Giving the capacity to flee mean the enemy can route. Route is where the killing is done

>>64982423
>surrender
So you submit to the fact that given an escape, they will take it rather to fight to the death?

>>64982427
>route
It's rout, esl.

>>64982279
They can run to the mountain caves whenever they want

>>64982466
Me and the boys en route to the rout to rout in the rout by the way of the routing route of course.

>>64982279
>The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting
Bombs them after failing to reach a deal whilst still in negotiations
>There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare.
weeks long war thus far
>When you surround an enemy, leave an outlet free.
Constantly assassinate their leaders, leaving enemy unable to surrender
>Know your enemy and know yourself
Go into the war without understanding that stockpiles cannot last and weakens us for the coming taiwanbowl
>Victorious warriors win first and then go to war
Dont know what the fuck is going on or how to "win". First is no nukes, then its no navy, then its regime change, then its straight of hormuz to be open. Clearly there is absolutely 0 fucking goal other than to bomb their ass.

We will still win regardless. Sun Tzu failed to anticipate the rise of super powers.

>>64982391
just encircle them and press them to surrender you dummy gorilla

>>64982478
Why did the greeks Thermopylae chose death by arrows rather than to surrender to Xerxes?

>>64982478
>surrender
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_last_stands

>>64982278
sun tzu didnt realize we are talking about an enemy "army" that is made up of at least 50% fucking inbreds.

>>64982345
It's ancient chinese Warfare for Dummies. Nuggets of immeasurable wisdom like "actually feed and pay your troops", "don't throw your army away because of vanity", and "try not to let the enemy know what you're doing while learning what they are". It was written entirely for retards which explains why they worship it like some kind of gospel.

>>64982480
Yes, the Spartans did surrender to the Persians and acted as their enforcers in Greece.

>>64982475
>us

>>64982475
what blew up this time?

sun tzu was not writing about how to fight religious fanatics that want to get killed already
from his other writings it makes sense to never make a rational enemy feel hopeless, as that increases resolve. That is not a factor in this engagement because the only way their eagerness to get themselves killed could possibly be reduced is to give them a crisis of faith which absolute devastation might, possibly, trigger. Therefore giving them no hope might actually have a positive effect.

>>64982539
Their in-fact leader was vaporized along with "bussyj" militia leader (or whatever it's name)and their Intel agency/ministry chief. The mosaic strategy is assembling.

>>64982278
If you don't care about your own losses you can just crush a surrounded enemy. A desperate foe will throw caution to the wind and, eventually, take many of your forces with him to the grave.

>>64982544
I voted for this

>>64982559
You're a Republican who voted for Kamala because Trump claimed she'd start a war in the Middle East?

>>64982569
Im a patriot who voted for a competent leader who has the nation's best interest at heart. Why would I want to vote for a woman who would flood my state with illegals and then ban guns too?

File: file.png (435 KB, 1100x1100)

435 KB PNG

>>64982278
don't forget rule number 1

>>64982573
What a retard. How can you win a war without fighting a war? Pay them trillions to fuck off?

>>64982279
>america broke every rule in this chink book recently and is still winning.
is it? lmao

>>64982579
Yes. Iran has no navy or air force left.

>>64982572
Should've picked another oil baron instead of the guy who maintained some level of liquidity by stealing from his fellow citizens.

>>64982579
How many dead mudshits does it take for you consider that they've lost faggot.

File: photo_2026-03-15_09-33-17.jpg (105 KB, 1280x721)

105 KB JPG

fascist animals wont save face this time

>>64982583
If you kill your enemies they win, anon. The more Iranians we bomb, the more martyrs they have. It is impossible to win.

>>64982524
This thread is full of retards who don't understand that it is in your interest to deny the enemy their glorious last stand and instead slaughter them while they're fleeing and in terror.

>>64982588
>claim
No ships or planes left. I suppose it is true that they say the victor is not victorious if the vanquished does not consider himself so

>>64982581
>>64982583
thousands of years later, Chinese wisdom is still lost on the barbarians. China will not help you open the strait, you have chosen the fastest path to defeat.

>>64982586
>the partial martyrization will proceed until morale improves

>>64982588
Trump is full warlord mode right now, riling up his horde of orcs with fake macho proclamations before he gets spectacularly routed. these fake bombastic claims are an invariable hallmark of defeat.

>>64982601
>these fake bombastic claims are an invariable hallmark of defeat.
Unlike getting your leaders whacked daily, of course.

>>64982331
>They why didnt the taliban surrender?
They did. Repeatedly. Several times over the course of several months.
Rumsfeld and Bush told them to fuck off, we'll keep fighting you.
So they did the same.

>>64982581
So why aren’t your lads sailing back home, mission accomplished?

>>64982601
It is the Taco's nature to fold.

-Ching Chong Chang of Yang

>>64982598
Then China can pay more for gas

>>64982612
>p-please go away I implore just go away

>>64982598
America has oil and doesn't fucking need middle eastern oil you retard. China is going to collapse because they are too stupid. Theres a reason why Trump didn't commit to opening the strait and its because it hurts China more than it could ever hurt America (it doesn't).. You really fucking think we can't open it if we wanted to?

America might be big and strong enough to shrug off the pain of forever wars and pushing large populations into permanent terrorist status... but it's more expensive than it needs to be. Anyway the principle is applied by plenty in the US Military even if there are some painful examples of when we didn't and dealt with massive insurgencies for extended periods.

There's two kinds of people in this world: those who take simple lessons and apply it to their situations and succeed, and those who handwave simple lessons because they deal with stuff "too complex" for those lessons to be relevant. The latter always seem to fail out of schools and get screwed over by lack of support and definitely the system fails them oh what a tragedy.

>>64982612
they sent the Poord home, it has no toilets and sailors are shitting on the flight deck, and it had a big fire that burned a ton of mattresses so sailors are sleeping rough. The other moved to a very long distance from Iran. It's clear that the burgers are covering up for some humiliation their navy had by the Iranians.

>>64982627
This is some insane cope that doesn't make even the least bit sense. I feel sorry for you I truly do.

>>64982623
How long until your lads can sail home then? 2 more weeks?

>>64982626
>There's two kinds of people in this world
Those with the United States Navy and those who dig.

>>64982632
It's week 3. Trump's initial damage control statement moved the deadline of the SMO from 4 days to 4-5 weeks, I think Hegseth also said as much. They have two weeks left to clean up their mess.

>>64982637
I’ve good reason to believe that Iran has more than big enough mullah reserves to outlast the burgers. Let’s see how it unfolds

File: images (28).jpg (19 KB, 529x378)

19 KB JPG

>>64982588
>Omae wa mou shindeiru

>>64982638
kek

>>64982578
Give their women rights.

>>64982357
Modern consensus is about 2

>>64982656
People are too afraid to use those 2 nowadays

>>64982581
Talibans didn't had air force or navy and still won lmao

>>64982279
They need to bomb harder. Simple as.

File: le serious.png (127 KB, 199x216)

127 KB PNG

>>64982656
..plus having the Soviets refusing to accept anything but total surrender, giving the Japanese the pick between the people who never found a king they didn't like and the folks who recently slaughtered their royal family.

>>64982279
Ameica lost taliban you lost Iraq isis is not winning is not is not winning

>>64982311
No thy are not dumbass the standard is custer were you are surrounded and call in callfor ire or jewmocracy and republcs

>>64982739
Holy ESL.

>>64982585
>not the art of the deal of war
you had one job bro

>>64982290
Pickett's charge DID have an escape. Confed soldiers could still run back down the hill even if they'd be taking fire the whole way down.

>>64982293
The idea is that you want them to run the gauntlet rather than fight to the death.
>>64982311
And we give the enemy the outlet of Surrender Under the Geneva Conventions. Before that, surrender meant execution or slavery.

>>64982478
Surrender and be slaves for the rest of their lives? Because that was the norm for most of history.

>>64982578
You convince one of their rivals to declare war at the same time as you and then offer generous terms of surrender. Congrats, you've won before even loading your guns.

>>64982475
>weeks long war thus far
Oh, so now you stupid niggers think that a few weeks is a long time? How about 4 years and counting?

>>64982279
Yes but not at the same time. We've also proven Sun Tzu true mostly by trial an error.

For example, the Battle of Midway kicked off because we had the Midway garrison transmit that they didn't have any drinking water. Next thing you know the Japanese Carrier fleet is getting jumped by the US carrier fleet right in the middle of bombing operations on Midway Island. "Appear weak when you are strong"

On the other hand, Vietnam was a massive waste of time with the Politicians meddling too much in Military Matters. "One whose general is able and is not interfered by the ruler will be victorious."

>>64982475
Winning alone is not enough. Yes, America can bury our enemies in tech and manpower. No, we shouldn't do that if we want to Stay a superpower. Rome was a superpower and it fell in part because it kept getting into wars and couldn't afford to pay for it all.

What we need to do is win so quickly and efficiently that the costs are negligible and in that, Sun Tzu still applies.

>>64982475
This nigga never heard of a pyrrhic victory. Another such victory and I'll be undone, but at least I got that sick dub am I right?

File: img_8433.jpg (163 KB, 690x468)

163 KB JPG

>>64982278
Bassically it's making sure when an enemy army is desperate and regular discipline starts cracking, that in their terror they succumb to their flight instincts rather than fight instincts. If they throw down their weapons and flee in blind animal terror to an obvious escape rout, it's easy to cut them down with cavalry. But if there isn't anywhere obvious to run to, blind animal terror might make them double down and fight like unhinged rabbid psychopaths to the last man.

A lot of ancient warfare tactics are actually about having an understanding of how mob psychology works.

File: mujahedeen_Afghanistan_1980s.jpg (790 KB, 2048x1367)

790 KB JPG

>>64982331
>They why didnt the taliban surrender?
>Because... WE LIVE HERE!

>>64982331
>taliban
Lost and fled to Pakistan, letting America do whatever in Afghanistan.
>VC
Completely wiped out and defeated.

>>64982705
They lost in 2001, just came back crawling from Pakistan after the US left in 2021 haha.

>>64982960
This. Too many teenagers that think winning is everything.
>>64982971
>A lot of ancient warfare tactics are actually about having an understanding of how mob psychology works.
Still is although it's less mob and more psychology.

>>64982345
>If there was a food shortage I'd simply go pick some fruit off the trees
>lmao if the stores were closed I'd just grow my own food
>I don't need to understand the fundamentals of warfare, what does some old chinese fuck know anyway?
Some people just do be like that. I am often humbled by how little changes in humans over literally thousands of years. A dick joke can arouse a chuckle in someone today, 10 years ago, 50 years ago, 100 years ago, 500 years ago, 1000 years ago, and equally how we react to the other tribe coming over the hill to steal our berry has not changed.

File: psyops.jpg (148 KB, 544x680)

148 KB JPG

>>64983068
>Still is although it's less mob and more psychology.
There are literally two psyop army groups under USSOC, not to mention the regular psyop specialists like picrel in the 101st.

>>64982739
America did not even try. Most casualties were them killing themselves. It was over as soon as it started. The fighters hid and waited. American left. If you call that winning you a dummy.

>>64983130
I didn't even know this bitch was AI. After many days saying I wish I could throw rocks at her. At least I figured it out myself : I

>>64982739
parappa over here

>>64982524
This can't be reiterated enough.
The entire point of the book is to teach retarded princes and other nobles the very basics of warfare, so they can go into a room with generals and other military experts and try to not be a hindrance.

File: Minuteman_Missile_Nationa(...).jpg (1.23 MB, 3840x2160)

1.23 MB JPG

>>64982578
I suppose that's what this was "adapted" from.

>>64982578
A better way of saying it would be to "achieve your objectives without fighting a war"

>>64982462
Yeah that was exactly what my post said. I was just also saying that when faced with a hopeless situation against an enemy that takes no quarter, fighting strength usually decreases rather than entering a fervor state, although there are certainly examples of the latter occurring.

>>64982475
>We will still win regardless.
You've already lost. There's no realistic "win" to be gained here that's worth the mess already caused.

>>64983196
>when faced with a hopeless situation against an enemy that takes no quarter, fighting strength usually decreases rather than entering a fervor state
That decrease in fighting strength is still a vastly inferior option to the enemy routing and breaking cohesion of his own volition. A demoralized enemy who holds his ranks and positions is still a vastly greater threat than an enemy who takes his chances at surviving by running away, allowing you to give chase and kill them one by one.
t. different anon

>>64983221
>There's no realistic "win" to be gained here that's worth the mess already caused
Not for you obviously, you don't care about any of the things that are being fought for.

>>64982524
>>64983168
True, it's why it's often mixed with 36 Stratagems.
>>64983130
Wasn't Skippy's List stared by a Psyops specialist?

>>64983228
What exactly Are we fighting for?

>>64983229
>Wasn't Skippy's List stared by a Psyops specialist?
I hadn't heard of it until now but yes.
>I must not drink 3l of blue food dye before a urine test
lol
There are some good lines in it.

>>64983232
>What exactly Are we fighting for?
"We" are fighting for the democratic west over the dictatorship east.
You're fighting to not get sent to an assault unit and reset.

>>64983236
>"We" are fighting for the democratic west over the dictatorship east.
If that's the case, then this war in particular is stupid and counterproductive war to begin with, as it directly conflicts with this stated goal.

Fucking over the global economy because the US' aspiring dictator is in a spat with some iranian dictator does not serve the cause of democracy or the western world order, it serves to undermine both.

>>64983244
>please leave the poor dictatorships alone

>>64983236
>the democratic west over the dictatorship east.
You realize we're being thrown into this war by the dictatorial action of a man that promised not to start more wars, right?

>>64983262
>You realize we're being thrown into this war by the dictatorial action of a man that promised not to start more wars, right?
Of all his broken promises, this is the one I like the most.

>>64983259
No, the real question is "WHAT THE FUCK DO WE HAVE TO GAIN BY FIGHTING A LAND WAR IN ASIA?"

File: Transnistria reintergrati(...).jpg (98 KB, 1280x720)

98 KB JPG

>>64983244
>does not serve the cause of democracy or the western world order
post Transnistria


>>64983268
>No, the real question is "WHAT THE FUCK DO WE HAVE TO GAIN BY FIGHTING A LAND WAR IN ASIA?"
A better world.

>>64982279
Strait of Hormuz status?

>>64983275
>A better world.
Bullshit. We tried that in Afghanistan and it didn't do shit.

>>64983268
Honestly, probably not much since it'll cause a massive shift in everything. On the other hand, shit happens whether we like it or not.

>>64983286
>We tried that in Afghanistan and it didn't do shit.
It did do something that made the world a better place, it helped to collapse the soviet union.

File: RSThermopylae9_16x9.jpg (387 KB, 1200x675)

387 KB JPG

>>64982971
Another aspect of this that's worth considering is that nobody ever got a song or ballad written about them for taking a lance to the back while fleeing for their lives. At least not without a considerable amount of spin doctoring. Beyond the immediate cost in blood you have to pay in killing a bunch of cornered guys fighting to the death, there's all the other mother fuckers you might need to fight latter who find heroic last stands inspiring.

Obviously finishing off desperate holdouts is something that's gonna happen occasionally. And sometimes you can't risk *any* chance of an organized retreat by the enemy. But a sensible professional trys to avoid those situations as much as possible.

>>64983318
>collapse the soviet union.
Dude, Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. The US invasion of Afghanistan happened in 2001. Did you sleep through history class? Suffer a severe blow to the head? Been watching Fox News?

>>64982279
America follows Sun Tzu too about only going in when you are overwhelming. Most of Sun Tzu is about implying that the reader doesn't have an overwhelming force and that they are a retarded court official seeking glory.

>>64983281
Fucking India and China up fierce, causing massive energy crisis in the third world.

>>64983404
> that they are a retarded court official seeking glory
Must...Resist...Political...Commentary!!

>>64983404
>Most of Sun Tzu is about implying that the reader doesn't have an overwhelming force and that they are a retarded court official seeking glory.
I'd imagne most of Sun Tsu's greatest victories probably involved retarded court officials seeking glory being his enemies. And his closest brushes with disaster when he had retarded court officials seeking glory as his allies. So art of war being a tard wrangling instrument makes sense.

>>64983404
>America follows Sun Tzu
No.
Sun Tzu's writings are empirical observations.
This claim of yours is like saying that if someone wrote down the following:
>the sun rises in the East and sets in the West
that the sun follows this someone's writing.

>>64983420
I mean he flat out states it a couple times, include a heavily implied threat that he would bury anyone who thinks they can now go against him using his 'Sun Tzu's guide to not getting rebelled against' book.

>>64982730
>the people who never found a king they didn't like
with the possible exception of George III

>>64983396
>Soviet Union collapsed in 1991
But your country was in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989.

>>64982625
>we didn't actually need that oil
Why is Trump begging for help on Twitter then?

>>64983420
>I'd imagne most of Sun Tsu's greatest victories
FWIW: quite a bit of Art of War was written by later authors just adding their own thoughts onto an already famous book so people would take them more seriously.
This is pretty common across the ancient world.

>>64982572
>voted for a competent leader
this retard couldn't lead anything but his most sycophantic zogbots to die for isreal, but I guess you are right kike, according to you isreal IS the best interest of the US.

>flood my state with illegals and then ban guns too
the illegals produce more money then probably every red state shithole that requires the assistance of its bluestate neighbors so they don't literally collapse and die

the last thing I remember Kamala saying anything about guns before the election I distinctly and vividly remember her going "I own a gun and if you come in my house I'll shoot you" so unless you REALLY think the gun lobby that has stopped every other piece of major gun ban legislation will let THIS democrat do it, you're just retarded.. but you voted for trump probably 3 times so

>>64983505
You know full well that "tried that and it didn't work" is referring to the US occupation of Afghanistan, not the supply of arms to anti-soviet insurgents decades earlier.

Besides, even that support to Afghanistan directly resulted in the US losing two skyscrapers to unplanned demolition via airliner, which kicked off two decades and counting of a destabilized middle east, with knock-on effects across the rest of the world. Even that noble action of fighting the soviet union is of debatable value given how rotten and salvageable the USSR was, since it may very well have collapsed a handful of years later anyway and we might have avoided much of the last two decades of sandbox related misery.

>>64982582
he would rather the kikes steal from him directly in front of his eyes as they also eat children while going "affordability is a hoax you poorfag loser" instead of them having to do it all behind closed doors like the sneaky jews they are

if you like trump you're a zogbot bootkissing isreal loving faggot, period, you LOVE the federal government and wish it would unironically shit on your face

>>64983547
>not the supply of arms to anti-soviet insurgents decades earlier
>from 1979 to 1989
Your knowledge of history is as bad as your grasp of sarcasm and understanding of nuance.

Who and where is that quote from about how hard it is to use feints against Russians because they never notice or aren't authorised to respond to the feinted move?

>>64982278
You stab them in the back when they try to run away. Duh.

>>64982609
Honestly if it was the US getting its leaders whacked and Iran claiming to have won nine times in two weeks, I'd definitely think it was over for Iran.

File: r39i8jt5x8jf1.jpg (38 KB, 750x459)

38 KB JPG

>>64982279
America's on a losing streak because it thinks it's exempt from this because of the power disparity. They respond by making a bunch of silly asterisks and moving the goal posts by retroactively redefining the objective as team deathmatch while fleeing from the enemy. You know so much less about war than the rice president of chinkland that you don't even know what you don't know.

File: Battle_cannae_destruction.svg.png (132 KB, 1280x985)

132 KB PNG

>>64982278
>>64982280
>absolute victories sound hard, don't attempt them
greatest military thinker of all time

>>64982278
This book was written for literal inbred retard teen boys who were gifted a position of leadership but had absolutely no life experience whatsoever. Thinking it's even worth a debate or that it is somehow enlightening or useful puts you at the same level of a 12 year old retarded Asian boy who's parents are a direct line of brother to sister and father and daughter. Follow that up with 12 years of not even having to dress or feed yourself.
It's a dumb fucking book for of contradictory statements and barely grazed the common sense it was trying to teach.

>>64983585
Sarcasm doesn't carry as text. You should know this.

>>64983505
Doing...what, exactly?

>>64983761
>but had absolutely no life experience whatsoever.
How did you attain life experience in wartime strategy?

>>64983776
>Doing...what, exactly?
Trying to impose communism I believe.

File: fart slave.png (199 KB, 316x487)

199 KB PNG

>>64983495
Nah, they liked George and George liked them.

It was Parliament they hated, for getting between them and the treaty they had with George while also denying them representation in questions of taxation.

>>64983792
I applied my life experiences and leadership skills to know things like, perhaps I shouldn't burn through a third of my overall population and half my nations wealth continuing this one battle just because I can. Now in the case of a spoiled little retard you would just tell them something like
>The longer a war goes on the greater your chance of defeat.
Now if a moron who is pinning the needle on the dunning syndrome meter reads this he may go on about how it's a brilliant statement about logistics in war.
It's not. It's a pp spank to keep spoiled brats from being spoiled brats.

>>64983797
In an earnest attempt to make the world a better place, in fact.

>>64983831
>perhaps I shouldn't burn through a third of my overall population and half my nations wealth continuing this one battle just because I can
No one will remember your name.

>>64982278
tbf to Sun Tzu, this advice made more sense in bronze age China where armies were overwhelmingly untrained peasants with dubious morale, 9/10ths of casualties came in the post-battle rout, fleeing foot soldiers couldn't outrun chariot archers on open terrain, captured enemies could be impressed into your army because you're all ethnic Han and no one particularly cares which nobleman winds up in charge, but the lack of actual rules and primitive logistics made it far more likely you'd be slaughtered out of convenience than taken prisoner if you attempted surrender, especially since doing so would allow more of the routing army to escape. Outside of this context (and particularly in the modern era) you really can't beat an encirclement or a good battle of annihilation.

A lot of the timeless and universal rules of strategy found in the Art of War are anything but.

File: IMG_4131.jpg (154 KB, 1308x702)

154 KB JPG

>>64982279
No, america follows this rule harder than almost any other country in recent history. Remember all those stories of nazi units trying to hold out long enough to surrender to americans? The amnesty pamphlets we’d drop to get iraqi units to surrender? America has the money and means to treat surrendered enemies unusually well, thus giving enemies an “out” in the form of a promise to let them live and return to their eventually. Thats part of why america does great against conventional armies and way less great against radical insurgency. Sending conscripts to fight against america works poorly unless theyre crazy propagandized to because everyone knows if you put your hands up youll survive the war, which is the main goal of most non-radicals in a battle. 72% of North Koreans captured in the Korean War refused to return to NK. American treatment is better than living in some countries. Thats a crazy ability to have, against conventional forces.

>>64983854
There are stories of a US soldier that was raised by a Japanese couple that would wander into Japanese lines and talk some of the most fanatical troops of WW2 into surrendering. Offering a way out really works.

>>64982279
Are you retarded? Even Trump, as big of a nigger as he is, is trying to give Iran an out as we just keep filling them up with fresh explosions. The fact that a bunch of dumb sandniggers think that Allah will eventually send in the djinn and save them is the only reason this isn't working.

>>64983881
To be fair, it's less of an out than the Orange Clown thinks it is. Any Iranian leader that agrees to a surrender is going to lose a LOT of face. Like, being known as McGivesUp the Coward levels of face. A good chunk of the Regime's legitimacy is based on them resisting Western Aggression so surrendering to random US attacks is kind of like George Washington handing the country back over to the British.

>>64982278
No escape means your enemy fights as hard as they can or they die trying. They're MUCH more likely to do everything they can to make you bleed when they otherwise would have fled instead. If they think they've got a chance they're either going to make your men suffer and die for every inch or throw a ton of effort into securing an escape. A cornered rat will fight harder to escape the cat.

Having an escape route is a false sense of security that can reduce the urgency and ferocity of your fighting. If you've locked them in the only way to escape a harder fight is making surrender a better option or re-opening an escape route. You can try to crush morale to counter this but that's a gamble and may make the situation worse. There's also a risk that the whole thing was a trap and you're about to have a bad time.

Desperation is when the war crimes come out.

>>64982290
GOOD SOLDIERS FOLLOW ORDERS

>>64983831
Well if that doesn't make you qualified to lead then I don't know what possibly could. I will follow you into Hell itself, sir.

>>64982279
*checks copy of "the art of war"*
*says made in China on the cover*
Well, that explains why it's cheap shit

>>64983909
While I understand that, the problem is that their situation is largely hopeless. Cutting a deal now might let them stave off absolute loss. In this instance, it's actually Iran doing the "no quarter" option via blocking major shipping lanes with maximalist objectives, yet even worse than what Confucius was warning about because Iran is the one on the back foot.

>>64984146
Gotta wonder what a captain of a nuclear ballistic missile sub is going to do when he learns he isn't getting paid.

>>64982391
>leave hole
>enemy retreats and regroups
>kill u

Strict advice like Chink Suu spams are retarded. All depends on situation.

>>64983689
>if you kill your enemies, they win

>>64984286
Oh ye of little faith
>Leave a hole
>Enemy retreats through
>Enemy gets shot by arrows as they retreat.
>Enemy gets picked off one by one by pursuing cavalry
>Enemy regroups
>Encircle the enemy as they regroup
>Odds even worse that the first battle
>Leave a hole.
Remember, all war is deception. Even the escape path isn't necessarily an escape.

>>64982280
If they're italian they just knuckle under to some empire again and paint pictures of romans.

>>64983995
NBA but it goes back to >>64982338 where if they sign a deal bad enough they'll probably get couped internally.
Stuff like this is why in the past, Iran's been allowed to get away with 'retaliation' for attacks that consist of dropping a few missiles in the same timezone as a US base with no intention of hitting anyone. Doing that allowed the less suicidal parts of the Iranian government to satisfy the more suicidal ones that something had been avenged without actually escalating things, and the US was happy to work with them a little on it.
Right now a problem is that there's a rhetorically unstoppable force against a propagandised immovable object. Trump went in talking so much shit that anything short of regime change will fall short of the dick-swinging, while anyone in Iran that wants to permit any kind of serious concessions after the war was started with the assassination of their leader is going to quickly lose whatever power they have. The US has boxed themselves and in turn Iran in.
This is also one of the reasons you don't typically try and take out a head of state in a war unless you're rolling into the capital by the way, playing nice with the people that just shot your predecessor is a very hard sell.
I do feel the need to point out that if I could snap my fingers and delete the current Iranian government I wouldn't give it a second thought, I just don't think the current approach is quite optimal.

>>64982278
The thinking man does not give their enemy means to escape to prevent them from being a savage cornered animal, the thinking man gives their enemy a single means to escape as a rout, so they take it and get slaughtered in a bottleneck.

>>64982466
>>64982472
It's pronounced the same way, either way.

>>64985278
I thought "route" was the same as "root", while "rout" was like "trout"

>>64982278
Most casualties for the majority of human history were done by causing the enemy to rout and then hitting them with cavalry. Preventing them from routing allowed them to dig in and fortify.
It made sense at the time.

>>64985285
It has much more to do with the accent of the speaker than the word.

>>64982583
>>64982581
Pretty sure there's still mo oil exports happening through the straight and most of the infrastructure in the region is still on fire.

>>64982625
>America has oil and doesn't fucking need middle eastern oil you retard.
Do you know what a market price is?

>>64982625
>You really fucking think we can't open it if we wanted to?
So, why do you not want to?
Why would you want to destroy your domestic economy with oil prices beyond the 100 dollars and severely damage the economy of your asian allies, who are supposed to assist you when the tensions in the region boil over?

>>64982279
the chinese writing the most famous book on war but literally never winning a single war in thousands of years is the most chinese thing ever. literally a nation of redditors

>>64982278
Sun Tzu didn't account for the advent artillery. Lead the enemy to an open field and blast 'em.

>>64987205
>chinese writing the most famous book on war but literally never winning a single war in thousands of years
Chinese were both winners and losers in most of their wars.
Both sides of almost every war in China were reading the book.

>>64982278
...unless your condition for winning is the total annihilation of the enemy, you always need to negotiate an exit with someone on the other side

>>64988274
You'd be surprised how many teenagers think total annihilation is the ideal.

File: my dog got raped by a nig(...).jpg (89 KB, 673x720)

89 KB JPG

>>64982278
>Trump demands unconditional surrender
>wants a coup by the Iranian public
>IRGC responsible for decades of war crimes including massacring over 30k civilians
>IRGC dependent on the largess of the government

People do realize that the IRGC will fight to the death since the only alternative is being destitute and on the run by angry Iranian civilians hunting them down and hanging them Nuremberg style?

I mean sure, Iran will probably lose if the USA goes for broke and constantly keeps bombing them non-stop, but that will take many months if not years. Trump/GOP doesn't have that kind of luxury.

>>64982280
That's the wounded dog theory and it usually doesn't work out like that in history. Sometimes it even allows you to win without fighting.

>>64982357
Douhet said a few thousand tons of poison gas bombs on a capital would be enough and for some reason nobody ever tested it.

>>64982427
t. total war pro

>>64982279
This has the same energy as the russian shills early in 2022.

It's not going well. Goalposts are being moved constantly, just like the russians did.

>regime change
>destruction of nuclear capability
>destruction of missile capability
>destruction of capability of closing Hormuz

You haven't considered the guy in charge is a raging narcissist with diminishing mental capacity surrounded by yes men?

>>64982326
>Sun Tzu's guidance (and many chinese proverbs) are intended to be applied figuratively as well as literally
The single biggest misinterpretation of The Art of War is that it's intended to be applied to anything but warfare or presents general principles that can or should be applied to business without heavy reinterpretation and synthesis.

>>64992151
So you're saying I Shouldn't burn my enemy's offices to the ground?

>>64992163
I'm saying it depends.

>>64982279
Why did America give Iran sanction relief? Arent they winning?
>If you know others and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know others but know yourself, you win one and lose one; if you do not know others and do not know yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.
Rule broken. America did not anticipate Iranian will to fight to remain after assassination of leaders
>What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy.
Rule broken. America has no plans to defend the strait or the many refineries in the region
>Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win.
Rule broken. Constantly shifting goals from regime change to destruction of navy or army to opening the strait implies America had no real clear goal or even a goal of attacking Iran's strategy.
>What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations
Rule broken. There is no swift victory to be had if enemy maintains ability to threaten global energy

>>64993352
>The general who wins the battle makes many calculations in his temple before the battle is fought. The general who loses makes but few calculations beforehand.
Rule broken. America did not take into account stockpiles.
>The general who advances without coveting fame and retreats without fearing disgrace, whose only thought is to protect his country and do good service for his sovereign, is the jewel of the kingdom.
Speaks for itself really

America, according to Sun Tzu, is doomed in this campaign. They either enter a long war or lose a short war. There is 0 fucking victory to be had. Lets see who will be correct, Dan Caine's staff or some dumb chink from 2.5 thousand years ago.

>>64983881
>the only reason we have not won is that our enemy has not lost the will or ability to fight
I think we need to have an objective that is more concrete than Trumps daily twitter dementia

>>64982278
it's easier to make the enemy retreat than in is to kill them all. but if you surround them and don't let them retreat you force yourself into trying to kill them all, which might not work out so well. look at the battle of Chosin Reservoir, the Chinese (ironically) surrounded the marines and tried to wipe them out, the marines eventually broke out and retreated but not before they inflicted heavy casualties on the Chinese. if they planned from the start to bloody them enough to cause a retreat, a lot fewer chinamen would have ended up face down in the snow.

>>64993368
>America, according to Sun Tzu, is doomed in this campaign. They either enter a long war or lose a short war. There is 0 fucking victory to be had
I think Sun Tzu would hesitate to describe what Israel did to Hezbollah last time as a war, more like securing a rebellious province.
I'm talking about operation you've-got-mail, I mean the clean-up afterwards where they mopped up leader after replacement leader until the entire command structure had been eliminated.

That's the goal here, so thoroughly dismantle IRGC C&C that they stand down from lack of orders and because everywhere they group explodes shortly afterwards.
No checkpoints, no garrisons, no armouries, no leaders...eventually, the locals can pick them off one by one.

>>64993893
>>64993352
Trump failed to execute his first announced goal, regime change, Iran seems to success with their own: survival. Now Trump is trying to salvage his reputation as anyone with a brain sees he failed his geopolitical objective. The rest is cope.

>>64993368
>The general who advances without coveting fame and retreats without fearing disgrace, whose only thought is to protect his country and do good service for his sovereign, is the jewel of the kingdom.
Kek. Any idiot could have figured out having an egomaniac commander in chief is a disaster in the making. Look at Crassus at Carrhae after telling allied Armenians he didn't need help.

File: I-dont-care-if-you-win-I-(...).png (520 KB, 640x639)

520 KB PNG

>>64993902
>Trump failed to execute his first announced goal, regime change, Iran seems to success with their own: survival. Now Trump is trying to salvage his reputation as anyone with a brain sees he failed his geopolitical objective
I don't give a fuck.

This isn't a board game where you have to reach 15 victory points and your faction has its unique way to earn VPs.
There many possible goals and if some of them prove difficult, lesser goals may become acceptable. It's a bit like peak oil in that sense.
That's still just about victory though.

Not being a MAGA or even a burger, I don't care about Trump. Actually him looking like a fuck-up is cool and I hope it helps his party of fuck-ups to get kicked out in the mid-terms.
I still want him to "win" this war though, or at least I want to see the IRGC lose and be destroyed and the Persian people free to live without a fundamentalist theocracy.
Eliminating the primary source of weapons, money and training for terrorists in the region and a Russian ally, is also a nice bonus and well worth everything that's been done so far and probably quite a bit more.
Can't make an omelette without killing a few people.

You're also acting like this is a win/lose scenario but I'm actually pretty ok with a lose/lose outcome, with the caveat that "losing" for US means having a few aircraft downed and spending some money, they're obviously not going to lose whole carrier groups or anything.

File: 1763286745131421.png (1003 KB, 815x805)

1003 KB PNG

>>64982279
Mr. President, please stop! It's too much winning!

>>64993352
>>64993368
This is gonna be a vietnam-tier shitshow. the kind Sun Tzu was trying to prevent thousands of years ago.

File: smalllel.gif (1.65 MB, 200x150)

1.65 MB GIF

>>64993902
>Trump failed to execute his first announced goal,
In otherwards: America is so insanely powerful that not being able to topple the Iranian government in two weeks via aerial bombardment alone is considered a failure

>>64983019
>They lost in 2001, just came back crawling from Pakistan after the US left in 2021 haha.

That means they won you retard.
The fact that they control the country in the end is the only meaningful victory. Everything else is just pointless showboating.

>>64994537
It's failure because he accomplished absolutely nothing other than harming US.

>>64994928
Or at the very least wasting a whole lot of money and lives.

>>64994537
Honestly? Yes. Even as an American I'm pretty disappointed about how things are going.

Just look at how fast we plowed through Iraq.

>>64983881
>won

lol

The only way Iran gonna stop is when Israel went up in nuclear fire. That orange pedo can choose to sit this one out or he can keep meddling and US military can keep being exposed

>>64994347
>with the caveat that "losing" for US means having a few aircraft downed and spending some money, they're obviously not going to lose whole carrier groups or anything.
You are mentally retarded.
Have you considered that our allies getting fucked means they trust us less and we lose international prestige?
Have you considered that the exorbitant privilege is now under extreme threat as all nations pivot away to renewables? This has the potential of collapsing American economy and causing the greatest famine mankind has ever seen. Im talking about hundreds of millions, perhaps billions dying. This includes Americans.

>>64994344
>implying any average person today is smarter than any average person from yesterday
Big fucking assumption, and that's including 99.99% of posters here.

>>64994537
America failed all its new goals afterwards since they kept moving the goalpost down when they failed the last one.

>>64993352
>>64993368
This is insane cope. IRGC got obliterated. Theres a reason why Trump is only bothering to send a couple of marine expeditionary units. Its because we won. The ground resistance will crumble away before contact, they just need someone to surrender to.

>>64982279
>and is still winning.
Are you winning, son?

>>64996731
Sounds like these people are not much breaching Sun Tzu's tenets. They are breaching basic "know thyself" tenets (as in: "know your mind / know the fuck you're doing").
>>64991250
The US have forgotten that a war is not like winning the Super Bowl, in which every hit advances the score and you go home claiming: "we scored more than our adversaries". I mean, scoring is a thing in war, and it surely matters. But it is not the only thing.

>>64997018
Iran has no navy, air force or army left. How are they "winning"? Is the "win" in the room with us? What are they on now, their 4th ayatollah?

>>64997022
>Iran has no navy, air force or army left
Please post evidence.
But let's assume what you say is true. Does it make America a winner? Is the bully "a winner" simply because it sent a fellow student (a nasty one, I agree) to the hospital?
I think you people here on /k/ are totally confusing "strategy" and "tactics". And I am ashamed to even raise the issue with you, here... But this board has become a shitshow since the war begun.
The US may have obtained a tactical victory, but there is no strategic victory in sight. And everyone with a pinch of salt in the defence community knows this is extremely dangerous.

>>64997031
Cry a little harder turdie. Might make me cum

>>64997022
So far they have stymmied all of the US' stated goals (regime change, protect local allies, keep the strait open). That doesn't mean they conventionally win, but if they endure and keep these goals out of reach, they can prevent the US from winning either. This is with the proviso that I don't know how long they can keep it up, it could be a Xeno's military collapse situation where they diminish but never truly get squished. That's why so many see boots on the ground as necessary if those US goals are ever to be achieved.

>>64982423
>rapidly degrade in fighting capability as its troops either surrender or try to desert and flee through gaps as individuals or small units
Almost as though you had followed Sun Tsu's advice and left an avenue of escape?

>>64996526
>Have you considered that our allies getting fucked means they trust us less and we lose international prestige?
Trump already did that, nothing happening with Iran is moving that needle.
Damage done, move on.

>exorbitant privilege is now under extreme threat
Sounds like a problem for burgers. It was already threatened, arguably demolished, by TACO anyway.

>as all nations pivot away to renewables
Cool, sounds like something good for the planet.
The only countries with a problem with renewables is the ones who's wealth and power come from fossil fuels.
Russia has been leveraging energy dependency for years, renewables dilutes their influence and revenue so it's a double-whammy.
And the less influence the gulf states have, the better.

>This has the potential of collapsing American economy
lol
They dominate many (perhaps most) industries, they'll be fine.
A few coal-rolling hicks will whine about gas prices and/or having to replace their suburban tank with a hybrid.

>causing the greatest famine mankind has ever seen
The fertiliser industry will be ok, there's alternatives and oil isn't going to zero as a result of this, just changing prices. The market can sort that out ok and marginal sites will come online.
Governments can choose to prioritise fertiliser production if they feel like it and long-range transport can be electric if it needs to be and often already is.

>>64997072
>They dominate many (perhaps most) industries, they'll be fine.
>A few coal-rolling hicks will whine about gas prices and/or having to replace their suburban tank with a hybrid.
retard
>>64997072
>The fertiliser industry will be ok, there's alternatives and oil isn't going to zero as a result of this, just changing prices. The market can sort that out ok and marginal sites will come online.
HOLY RETARD

File: 1772467896349621m.jpg (160 KB, 768x1024)

160 KB JPG

>>64982279
God DAMNED right

File: 1772419970291964.png (106 KB, 870x493)

106 KB PNG

>>64982739
>>64982578
The chinks do it with TikTok and reverse engineering

>>64982278
"Too hard" is very discretionary. It's a very sinoid way of speaking that places the speaker beyond criticism.

But Tolkien said something similar in Farmer Giles of Ham: leave the dragon a mort of gold to keep respectable, or he shall fight to the death, dragon-slaying sword or no.

So there might be something to the idea.

Treaty of Versaille is clearly "too hard", even if it was technically truce and mercy. Something more lenient.

>>64992151
But of course *with*
>heavy reinterpretation and synthesis
Nobody ever claimed otherwise
You could and should also apply the Book Of Proverbs across your life, all Christians will agree, but it will take
>heavy reinterpretation and synthesis
as well

>>64982278
As always with the greatest military strategist of all time, this on is entirely dependent on context.
>can you crush the enemy forces without incuring significant losses?
Crush them.
>can you starve them out?
Starve them out.
>are you going to defeat them but take terrible losses
Leave them an opening, let them escape, leaving behind as much equipment as possible.

And for the most important question
>will you know any of this shit beforehand
Lol. Lmao.

>>64982278
Sounds reasonable to be honest. A surrounded enemy has basically four options:
>fight until they run out of ammunition/food/water and surrender
>try to break out
>be relieved
>be annihilated

By leaving an outlet you can control how many people leave and where they leave to. Or have the relief forces enter the same trap.

>>64982278
The point of the quote is that if you surround an army entirely, they know they're dead and will fight to the last.

If you leave them an escape, a LOT of them will try to run away (where your cavalry can chase them down and slaughter them after you kill the brave).

>>64982656
The Japs didn't even care aboit the bombs. They just saw them as more expensive firebombs that America had already been dropping on them however they pleased. What got them to surrender was the US admitting after several months of begging "okay, you MAY be allowed to keep the emperor after you surrender". That was literally all their high command cared about at the end. Not their own survival, or the hundreds of thousands who'd die in an invasion, just whether or not Hirohito would dodge the noose and keep his throne.

>>64982730
>people who never found a king they didn't like
What about trump?

>>64982331
Being religious fanatics who are told that they get rewarded for dying makes them more likely to fight than to surrender.

>>64982278
that's how warfare was 1500 years ago
/k/eddit cannot comprehend old texts

>>65000248
>>64982656
Dude, the surrender of Japan is crazy. You had a captured US pilot who didn't know shit, said he didn't know shit, got tortured anyway, and then lied and said the US had a thousand bombs ready to go.

Then the Emperor wanted to surrender but most of the Big 6 didn't want to surrender so there was this plot to arrest the Emperor of Japan. However, this got kicked in the head because he's the Fucking Emperor and who the fuck would Dare arrest their own emperor?

So then the Emperor gives his speech but he's also a secluded person so most of Japan doesn't even realize it's the Emperor at first and there's an attempt to stop the broadcast at gunpoint but that got stopped by a District Army.

Then the US Navy showed up and almost everyone just accepted that this was happening.

tl;dr it's a good thing the US didn't kill the Emperor or Japan would still be fighting.

>>64982278
Back when most fighting was done up close and personal, if you leave the enemy nowhere to run and won't let them surrender, you'll lose a lot of your own men fighting desperate cornered enemy.
As >>64982289 pointed out your best chance for a decisive victory that lets you preserve as much of your own force as you possibly can is breaking the enemy and killing as many as you can as they rout.