The major object of the study of the military theory is a military action. There are many variants of its definition, ranging from simple rather complex interpretation.
According to general consensus military action is a result of human civilization, of armed confrontation between the formal and informal groups of society, their mutual apparition and offering of resistance to one another.
The given definition directly paints to the fact that the nature, essence, scale and results of the armed action are in functional relationship with the economical, technological, ideological, socio-political, and diplomatic standards of the development of society. It is also in direct relationship with real conditions of state, national, armament, armed action waging and many other components and the processes of their variation dynamics.
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION
2. FIGHTING CAPACITY OF THE COMBATANTS
3. DYNAMIC AND GEOMETRICAL PARAMETERS OF THE FIGHTING SYSTEMS
4. SYSTEMATIZATION OF DYNAMIC PROCESSES OF INDIRECT ACTIONS
5. INTERDEPENDENCY OF STRATEGY, OPERATIONAL ART AND TACTICS
6. MATHEMATICAL MODELING OF MILITARY PLANNING SPACE
Objectives and Topics
This work aims to develop a formalized and systemic approach to military theory by applying principles of mechanics to model armed actions. It seeks to replace ambiguous traditional definitions with rigorous, parameter-based logic to better analyze and plan for modern, asymmetric warfare scenarios, specifically focusing on the interrelationship between fighting systems, their capacity, and the strategy of indirect action.
- Systematization of the Fighting System and Fighting Capacity.
- Mathematical modeling of dynamic processes and indirect actions in military conflicts.
- Clarification of the interdependency between military strategy, operational art, and tactics.
- Establishment of a logical framework for military planning space.
- Critical analysis of traditional concepts like "indirect action strategy" through the lens of mechanical analogies.
Excerpt from the book
FIGHTING CAPACITY OF THE COMBATANTS
The starting parameter of conducting the armed action is the FIGHTING CAPACITY of individual subunits, parts, units, small and large units of troops and formations.
FIGHTING CAPACITY should be considered in functional dependence with its major argument - fighting resources.
Accordingly, FIGHTING CAPACITY is a condition established in complex by systematizable and non-systematizable circumstances and conditions of forces and means which, in a particular armed action determines the parameters of realization of FIGHTING CAPACITY in a definite time period and space.
Along these lines, the concept of fighting stability already exists in military theory, but its traditional definition is imprecise [156]1, it is not concretized, lacks assessment of its essence and importantly, it does not contain arguments for use in researches in the military theory field.
Thus, it is necessary to work out a proposition that would define the parameter of FIGHTING CAPACITY, the parameter - FIGHTING STABILITY should also be specified and its place assigned. To this end, FIGHTING CAPACITY, as major parameter of armed action, should be discussed more extensively.
Summary of Chapters
INTRODUCTION: Outlines the necessity of applying a formalized, systemic model based on the logic of mechanics to clarify modern military theory and armed action.
FIGHTING CAPACITY OF THE COMBATANTS: Defines and systematizes the core concept of Fighting Capacity and introduces the Fighting System as a complex set of elements connected by functioning links.
DYNAMIC AND GEOMETRICAL PARAMETERS OF THE FIGHTING SYSTEMS: Explores the mechanical analogies used to define Fighting Systems, including their geometry, redistribution of masses, and types of links.
SYSTEMATIZATION OF DYNAMIC PROCESSES OF INDIRECT ACTIONS: Applies the developed model to analyze the strategy of indirect actions, classifying various impact scenarios by force of arms.
INTERDEPENDENCY OF STRATEGY, OPERATIONAL ART AND TACTICS: Critically reviews existing schemes relating the components of war and proposes a new configuration based on set theory to better reflect modern warfare.
MATHEMATICAL MODELING OF MILITARY PLANNING SPACE: Argues for the necessity of an intermediate layer—military planning—between military science and military art to effectively model and manage complex armed actions.
Keywords
Fighting Capacity, Fighting System, Armed Action, Military Theory, Mechanics, Indirect Action, Fighting Stability, Asymmetric Warfare, Fighting Elements, Fighting Links, Military Planning, Force of Arms, Loading, Systematization, Strategy.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this work?
This work fundamentally focuses on creating a formalized, systemic model for military theory by drawing analogies from the principles of mechanics to analyze armed actions.
What are the central themes discussed in the book?
The central themes include the definition and systematization of the "Fighting System" and its "Fighting Capacity," the classification of military impacts, and the rigorous restructuring of the relationship between strategy, operational art, and tactics.
What is the ultimate goal of the proposed research?
The primary goal is to provide a logical, parameter-based framework for military planning that allows for predictable and effective decision-making in modern, complex, and often asymmetric military scenarios.
Which scientific methodology is employed by the author?
The author employs an approach based on the idealization logic of mechanical systems, utilizing concepts like mass, inertia, force, and system dynamics to model and quantify military actions.
What does the main body of the work cover?
The main body covers the definition of the Fighting System, the systematization of Fighting Capacity and Stability, the dynamic parameters of armed conflict, the classification of direct and indirect impacts, and a re-evaluation of military planning models.
Which keywords best characterize this monograph?
Key terms include Fighting Capacity, Fighting System, Armed Action, Indirect Action, Military Theory, and Mechanics, among others that describe the structural and dynamic modeling of combat.
How does the author define the "Fighting System"?
The author defines it as a set of Fighting Elements deployed in space and connected to one another by means of functioning links (or Fighting Links) in a specific layout, possessing its own Fighting Capacity.
What role does "Military Planning" play in the author's model?
The author identifies military planning as an essential intermediate intellectual layer or spatial layer that connects the theoretical principles of military science with the practical reality of military art.
How does the author treat the "Strategy of Indirect Action"?
The author subjects the traditional "Strategy of Indirect Action" to a systemic analysis, arguing that many concepts traditionally categorized as indirect are actually forms of direct impact, and seeks to clarify these definitions based on his formalized model.
- Citar trabajo
- Professor Elguja Medzmariashvili (Autor), 2009, Novel approach to indirect actions of military theory, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/178946
