Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

War Room 30: Policy-Strategy-Tactics at Pearl Harbour (Patreon)

Published:
2026-08-08 13:53:48
Imported:
2026-08
Tags:

Videos

  • 714036294.mp4

Downloads

Content

Or... how to lose a war with your opening move. This is some slightly different War Room content, I'm not 100% happy with it but I've been slogging away at it for ages and it's got to go out at some point. It's really difficult not to get dragged down into the minutiae (or worse... definitions *shudder*) but hopefully I've gotten a very simple, but very powerful concept across.

Files

Comments

Boone

Loved it, and I am here for continuing the series!

GLG

I liked the piece and look forward to further explorations into the hierarchy of military 'art.' Japan's strategic plan was almost logically flawed. They failed to correctly assess American values and capabilities, faults likely due to hubris. Committing to a surprise attack feels 'over the top' in terms of necessity. The expanse of possessions under US military protection in the Pacific were very widespread and it would have been entirely possible for Japan to declare war at 11am in Washington DC and still be only 5am on Oahu. Pre-emptive attacks are usually conducted as force multipliers, and that's usually in order to make up for less than ideal odds or combatant quality. So, it doesn't add up to my mind--unless the underlying factor was contempt. I like that you don't have an operational interface between strategy and tactics. I only recently eschewed the concept of an operational middle layer wrt military art. I'd often found terms like 'operations,' 'operational level' and 'operational art' weren't necessarily subsets of one or the other. In my mind they all mean distinct things and don't always intersect one another. It's much cleaner as military theory to view the hierarchy of military art as Strategy and Tactics, then incorporate the concept of Operational Art as the means of managing tactics to meet strategic goals. Policy or Politics drives the whole mess. This definition releases Operational Level and Operations from any integral linkage with Operational Art. Operational Level becomes a term defining specific scale and scope, and Operation is a military plan with a focused objective.

Rowan McAtasney

I feel like I’m getting a university level education from your war room vids

UsuallyHaplessVideos

Honestly, the hardest part of this was deciding what to take the time to define. There are so many different definitions floating about that anything deeper than surface level is kind of automatically flawed.

Ray L

The Japanese also erred in thinking they had the military might to conquer China. They could win battles against the Nationalist and Communist armies, but the Chinese just retreated into their vast territory and refused to surrender. The Japanese army lacked the logistic capability to pursue with ever increasing supply lines, especially given the lack of east-west rail lines in China.

Ray L

Fun fact: My father was a 20 year old USAAF pilot in China, one of the few (and perhaps only) Chinese-American who flew with the American Air Force and not the Chinese National Air Force.

GLG

I completely agree. Definitions are critical when talking about this stuff. US military interpretations of Soviet military theory may very well have made things worse with AirLand Battle doctrine.

Ben Kerry

That's crazy. I'm a mainland Chinese actually.