Markup View

Author: kjnoren

Oct 28th 2013 at 7:21:12 AM

^^^^ Neither, I'd say.

The strategic context fails, in that it simply is reduced to a surprise assault aimed at a quick campaign.

The tactical context also fails, in part because the scope of "carve up their interior ranks" falls outside tactics, and in part because the blitzkrieg wasn't about breaking through the enemy's front lines.

Now, there is no good definition of ''blitzkrieg'' anywhere, in large part because it was always more of a popular term than one used in military theory.

However, I think the following needs to be emphasised:

* Mobility over firepower; defeating the enemy not directly in battle but by cutting of their means of support
* As a corollary to the above, focus on bypassing and encirclement
* "Just-in-time" support for the mobile forces
* Quick decision making and leadership from the front

Recommended reading: [[http://www.google.se/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=blitzkrieg+operational&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CDwQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dtic.mil%2Fcgi-bin%2FGetTRDoc%3FAD%3DADA435929&ei=V3BuUueQGczx4gTLnYHQAg&usg=AFQjCNGy1ufuw7VnI-SiWmndxj-jiBhBHw&sig2=GScceV-DBe3Tmn8Oq8jr0A The Operational Art of Blitzkrieg]]