|
Hmmm. I'm going to talk about 3 parts of an enemy:
-His Cunning
-His Determination
-His skill
In my mind, the enemy can be some, all, or none of these.
If he's determined but not skilled or cunning, of course he's dangerous but not subtle at all. Historical aside: The kamikaze example. Very dangerous to the US Navy in WW2, but nothing of cruiser size or larger was sunk by a kamikaze. Damaged, yes. Sunk, no. Off Okinawa the picket radar destroyers had a problem by being often alone and the closest to the attacking waves of aircraft. So much so that one sailor, disgusted with all the attacks on their destroyer, painted a large arrow with the sign "CARRIERS THAT WAY". In my mind the attacks on the outpost destroyers shows a lack of cunning. Obviously the carriers and transports are the most important targets. Skill? I doubt the kamikaze pilots were given much training. After all, they're going on a one-way missions!
Pearl Harbor is a great example of being outwitted. Apparently those in command looked at what was LIKELY instead of what was POSSIBLE. Nobody ever launched such a surprise attack via multi-carrier task force before and we'll get a declaration of war in advance, right? Survey says, BUZZZ! (actually, Taranto 1940 in Italy was a model for the surprise carrier attack).
Back to our discussion:
If the enemy is skilled but not determined or cunning, I'd think he'd be easy to sucker or outwit or even outfight.
If the enemy is cunning, IMHO he doesn't have to be skilled and only needs a moderate dose of determination. One good blindside and WHAMMO you're outta there as the umpires say. This is the most dangerous factor. Cunning needs to be right up there with alertness in priority. Outmaneuvering the bad guys so they don't get you cornered might win the battle without a fight.
But Cunning also has to apply to friendlys. How reliable is that buddy of yours?? Is he going to run for it at the first sign of trouble? Not a bad plan if you both already decided to do that. If I decided to fight and my buddy runs, whoops, where's my backup??
One of my friends lived in Yemen back in the 70's or something. He described Yemeni revenge: Just blasting someone with an AK was considered of no great skill. Yemenis considered the highest form of revenge was to befriend the guy, and 20 years later during a Yemeni greeting hug with both arms encircling, the treacherous one pulls a knife from his sleeve and rips the other guys back open. Now THAT's what I call treachery!! Only defense against that would be 20 years of vigilance of who your friends really are.
Hope that makes sense.
Edmund
|