Where are the basics of military science described?

[rupol2000]

This is a colonial regime. The local state police must obey the state itself, then it will be the freedom of the local population.

 

[rupol2000]

I think that in the United States, the most free system is essentially not the police, but the local militias. The word police there is generally a convention. There is no single management, and all police officers have local subordination, the sheriff is elected to the position. That is why the American police are the best in the world in terms of professionalism, and the least corrupt police.
The United States is a unique country, in fact, it has preserved the traditional way of the military aristocracy and tribal relations.

 

[rupol2000]

This system is like a fragile beautiful flower in a dirty world, it is dangerous even to breathe on it, so as not to accidentally break it. We must protect this system from dirty left hands at all costs.

 

[rupol2000]

Yes, "semantically" in the US it is the militia, not the police

 

[Mushroom]

I do not like this.

Here is the beauty of science. It does not care what you like.

 

[Mushroom]

This difference is politic.

And your saying that just proves you do not understand the difference.

To say it simply, "Military Science" is not only studying the strategy and tactics, but even more importantly the logistics behind how to run a military.

 

[rupol2000]

Here is the beauty of science. It does not care what you like.

I think there are more worthy examples, but they hide it. This book dates back to the end of the Han era, a state that was truly military. The "classical" Chinese were peasants, they made up the unprofessional mass infantry. There was a tough discipline of the slave army.

In general, the first known military treatise is the Dhanur Veda, the Veda of the art of archery. I could not find the original of this treatise, but it is, and it is much more ancient.

 

[rupol2000]

And your saying that just proves you do not understand the difference.

To say it simply, "Military Science" is not only studying the strategy and tactics, but even more importantly the logistics behind how to run a military.

It has nothing to do with it. Both were previously ordinary armies, the difference is that the militia in ancient times was a local, possibly tribal army, and the police were imperial colonial army of polises. In this sense, the American police are the militia.

 

[rupol2000]

Although it has become a formality now, for the most part now police and militia mean the same thing. Nevertheless, the ideological aspect still matters. The Russian Militia was renamed the Police and re-certification was carried out there. I don't know the details, but these reforms coincided with the beginning of the tightening of the regime.

 

[rupol2000]

Although, if we proceed from this initial semantics, the militia of the USSR and the Russian Federation have always been the police, and have always been subordinate to the federal department, and the US police have always been the militia.

 

[rupol2000]

there was no equality in the policies, the inhabitants of the cities were citizens, and the rest were dependent and slaves. Therefore, the police were used to suppress the local population by the colonial authorities.

 

[Silver Cat]

Is there some kind of classic of military literature that introduces the basics of military affairs and is recommended for a military specialist of any profile as elementary knowledge of military affairs?

Talking about modern, nuclear age, conflicts I would like to recommend you Herman Kahn, 'On Thermonuclear War', in the commented Russian translation.

О термоядерной войне (Ярослав С.)

Мы живём в интересное время. Любое время по своему интересно, но именно наше интересно тем, что человечество, после нескольких столетий непрерывного роста (как материального богатства, так и численности населения), основанного на освоении всё новых и новых природных ресурсов, вплотную подошло...

aftershock.news

 

[whitehall]

What science? There is strategy, weapons technology, communications, transportation and tons of sub-topics. You can't possibly understand it all and that's why every member of the Service including general officers and admirals has a "MOS" which is your job title.

 

[fncceo]

 

[toobfreak]

The Art of War - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Bastard. I hate you. You beat me to it. Sun Tzu is history's ultimate military strategist bar none!

 

[toobfreak]

I agree to disagree, our Second Amendment is quite unambiguous and very clear as to what is Necessary to the security of a free State.

If the police are your militia also as the previous poster suggests, then the above cannot work.

 

[danielpalos]

View attachment 566188

If the police are your militia also as the previous poster suggests, then the above cannot work.

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

 

[SavannahMann]

I have read some of the descriptions and quotes in this book. I do not like this. There is little concret methods and a lot of reasoning that supposedly cunning should be superior to direct collisions and softness wins hardness. This is roughly what has been taught in martial arts since the 60s. But all these disciplines are just show, and all these cunning and "strategists" avoid fighting with Muaythai fighters who can simply break skulls without any cunning.

All of this looks like a profanity, and it can be seen even in the way the Chinese transform traditional martial arts such as qigong.

Applying the lessons from Sun Tzu. Let’s look at two battles of the same war to compare and contrast.

The defense of the Philippines. The officers lied to the troops and told them that the Aide was coming. A huge convoy of troops and supplies that would reinforce the beleaguered troops. The Officers didn’t want the men to lose hope. But when the troops learned they were lied to it crushed Morale.

Guadalcanal. Again. Isolated troops. Underfed. Under equipped. Little or no supply or support. Outnumbered. Out gunned.

The Officers told the troops. It was victory or death. There was no retreat. No help. No one was coming to save them.

Sun Tzu called this Death Ground. The troops had nothing to lose. They fought like lions. Outnumbered facing similar battle hardened troops as the Defenders in the Philippines faced. The Marines on Guadalcanal were victorious.

Appear weak where you are strong. Midway island appeared weak. It looked like a really easy target. Especially against the massed might of the Japanese Fleet.

In reality it was much stronger that it appeared. And the Japanese were caught by surprise.

What you are looking for is a book that spells out the strategic and tactical doctrine. That doesn’t really exist. And if it does. Nobody would use it. Americans especially throw doctrine out the window when the war actually appears.

 

[rupol2000]

If the police are your militia also as the previous poster suggests, then the above cannot work.

Why?

First, the US police are essentially the militia.

Secondly, the people's militia can act in conjunction with the police.

Nothing like that, it fits with the second amendment. Moreover, the 2nd amendment directly declare this.

 

[rupol2000]

What you are looking for is a book that spells out the strategic and tactical doctrine. That doesn’t really exist

There is some early 20th century literature on deep combat theory.