Is the best defence a good offence? Is the best apple a good orange?

Question

3-D

Maybe my point is that offense and defense are polar opposites. Apples and oranges are 2 distinctly different things but are still more closely related than offense and defense.

The 'Art' of War? My understanding of Art is limited but isn't it supposed to be something creative, not destructive. Thank you for the literature suggestion but I'd rather not read oxymoronical propaganda.

Answer 1

Why do nations have a Department of Defence to attack other countries?

I like oranges and apples but I don't like wars.

Answer 2

The best defence is a good offence because a good offence prevents the war from happening in the first place.

You don't win wars on defence. The best you can do is wind up spending lots of money and lives to keep things they way they are... until you get tired and can't afford it anymore, or the other side gets lucky. Then the war is over because you lost. Even if you win it can be prohibitively expensive.

Look at WW1. For reasons of technology and geography the Western Front became two long lines of defensive works, stretching from the English Channel to the Swiss border, then picking back up on the Austro-Italian border till they hit the Adriatic. Neither side could break through the others defenses. The Germans finally lost because the English Navy's blockade starved them into submission, but it took 4 years, and was a very near run thing. Europe still hasn't totally recovered, probably never will.

Playing defense only gets you time. You need to go on the offensive to win. That was our biggest problem in the Viet Nam war... we couldn't REALLY take the offensive (like send the tanks north and capture Hanoi) because we were afraid the USSR would jump in and WW3 would start. Same thing in Korea.

So defense is just a way of loosing slowly. If you want to win you need to take the offense.

If you have the ability to take the offense, to go into the enemy capital and physically occupy it, arrest his leaders, fly your flag over his capitol building and impose your will on his nation... well he isn't going to attack you in the first place. There are lots of little third rate dictators out there that would love to mess the USA, or Russia, or even the UK or France... but they don't because they know that if they did the USS Nimitz or the Spetsnaz, or the HMS Ark Royal or the French Foriegn Legion would come and kick there behind. This is why Israel is still around. (Do a Google search on "Entebbe Raid" to see what I mean.)

So, by having a good offense (being able to utterly destroy anyone who attacks your country) you prevent them from attacking in the first place. This is a better "defense" than actually having to defend your nation, because even defensive wars cost money and lives.

It is called "deterance" and it is why we never had WW3.

Answer 3

Yeah I guess in Football sometimes but not in real life neither is appropriate replacements for the other. There has to be a balance. And if the offence was the best for defense we would not have enough players or we would not need the defense, and that is impossible. So your point is well taken, Bravo!

Answer 4

You need to read Sun Tzu's The Art of War.

Offense and Defense are NOT polar opposites. Only your lib college professors and public school teachers think that.

Answer 5

Right on, I mean left on.