Discussion

(Japanese version below; 日本語訳以下

Hello everyone, I write to share the info for an upcoming virtual public event that I think will be of interest to H-Environment members.
Further details about the event are available below, and here, on the Yale Environmental Humanities webpage.
 

As you say .... it depends.

"Over the years the metaphor of king or queen of the battlefield has come and gone. Which military organizational construct is most effective ? Let us just assume they are all effective, just not equally so in all instances and all circumstances."

The enemy is defeated when he thinks he is (sorry for the gender thing) ..... what causes that thought to arise varies.

Infantry is generally needed, but not always. Japan surrendered before a single Allied soldier put boots on the ground, right?

One can cite numerous examples, especially since 1945, of infantry “owning the enemy’s real estate” without defeating the enemy. The ability of US infantry to go wherever it wanted in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan and win lots of tactical engagements did not produce victory (a lasting and beneficial strategic effect) for the USA. This raises the question - infantry may not be “obsolescent” but is it actually useful and relevant in any kind of war in which the US is likely to engage? Can it produce meaningful victory at a tolerable cost?

This question and brief summary just emphasizes to me that there are two realities within military history, fads and trends impact military organizations just as any other institutions since people are subject to fads and trends and that, emerging technology appears at first to solve all ills but militaries need to learn how to integrate these new technologies into an overall scheme much faster.

You present an interesting supposition. I suppose I am biased, but I believe that you can bomb and shell terrain ad infinitum but until it is occupied by your army it still belongs to your adversary. I remember reading a letter from Field Marshal Lord Wavell to the Times of London, discussing the role of infantry in the war. The full text is on the web at http://www.regimentalrogue.com/misc/in_praise_of_infantry.htm. I think the relevant passages are as follows:

I vaguely remember a quote from a milhist seminar course in undergraduate school Frederick the Great, I think - to the effect that you can’t defeat an enemy without owning his real estate. And in order to do this, you need infantry.

Dear Colleagues,

Last month, the Jhistory started what we hope will be regular informal Zoom sessions about various topics. The next session will be today, Friday, June 4 at 2 p.m. Eastern / 7 p.m. BST London. Last month we talked about discussing strategies of explaining the importance of journalism history to colleagues and the outside world, and that could be an organizing topic. There was also a lot of discussion around diversity, challenges for junior faculty members, and the pandemic.

And of course, the video that started it all: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcy7qV-BGF4

Dear All,

Reposting the following link from a subscriber announcing a resources... just to make sure it goes out via email notifications. 

https://networks.h-net.org/node/11465/links/7723033/visualizingperforming-blackness-afterl...

Best wishes, 

Dave