For a very substantial reason.
The reasons being:
1. There are currently NO serious Russia scholar in the West, with remarkable exception of people like Colonel Jacques Baud or Lester Grau. NONE, period. Russia's XX century history is a combination of horror fantasy novels and lies from dissident community and white immigration. How about learning about Soviet realities from REAL historians.
2. For any Western "strategist" writing on Russia the "research" should start from discarding fantasies and fairy tales about West's role in WW II and appropriate use of war correlates and statistics from authoritative sources--not from former Wehrmacht losers who supplied Anglo historiography with pseudo math and copious amount of BS.
3. Studying "strategy" without serious operational background and apparatus (tool kit) which goes into it--is a waste of time. Without serious grasp of math and physical principles on which modern battlefield and technology operate this whole "study" is a waste of time and will produce no positive outcomes with the exception of what Western "strategists" (most of them with humanities degrees) usually do--quoting Clausewitz, Sun Dzu, Jomini et al. This is a fool's errand.
4. In the end, they either accept the fact that the US is primarily a naval power and is not even in the same league with Russia in continental warfare, or they should simply cancel this order and stick to what they know best--confabulation of warfare.
These four points describe in general why reading Western "researches" not gonna help.
No comments:
Post a Comment