What wins wars? Numbers or superior military science and tech?

What wins wars? Numbers or superior military science and tech?

Attached: 1376464186338.jpg (418x720, 60K)

like most things of this nature its a balance of both thats the best.

depends on the battlefield.

Logistics, training, command and control, force multipliers, technology, raw numbers. Generally in that order.

Until nukes are involved. Then the answer is nukes.

Nowadays, it heavily leans toward the latter.

a mix of all 3

>battle of cannae
carthaganians were outnumbered, but superior tactics annhilated the romans (conclusion: tactics > numbers)

however, the romans were still able to bounce back and re-arm themeselves and eventually triumph over carthage in the long run (numbers > tactics)

the lesson?
the romans were able to properly assess and analyze the situation, deduce the weakness of the enemy and their own advantages, and were able to methodically devise an approach that allowed them to leverage the advantages they had while also cutting the advantages of the carthaganians
fabian tactics were able to completely nullify the superior strategies of hannibal by avoidinga large set piece battle while also taking advantage of their home court by being able to deny them any sort of food or shelter

>iran-iraq war
the war was a stalemate, with both sides suffering comparable losses and casualities
however, the iranians had a smaller, less well equipped army
iran also ended up being relatively more propserous and peaceful in the long term

lesson?
numbers and technology dont matter if you dont have the ability to properly utilize them

>overall lesson
there isnt a very specific answer
except for the broad term of "logistics"
its usually a mix of all them combined with not being stupid

Tactics and guts.

Attached: Finland vs Soviet.jpg (750x600, 100K)

Will and intelligence

At the end of the day, it will always come down to an infantryman and his rifle.

t.11b

In modern warfare, technology and superior firepower take battles consistently. However the resolve of the nation's inhabitants, often seemingly has won out overall.

Industrial capacity. Industrial capacity is the end all be all.
>Logistics
Important, but what's the point of being able to get something to the front lines if you don't have anything useful to bring to the front lines
>Training
Training to use what?
>Force multipliers and technology
How are you going to build them?
>Tactics
Yikes!
>Winter war
USSR would have won with another month of combat.

Well defined strategic objectives with the capacity to achieve them.

You’re mostly retarded
mostly

Not being Arabic
Also, TEMPO TEMPO TEMPO

>USSR would have won with another month of combat.
Yeah but they didn't.

Not so true these days. Infantry are our biggest reliability now. Our enemies now they just have to kill enough troops to get USA to not want to continue the war.

Kill enough of anything and no one will want to fight, that’s the point of war, retard. Anyway, in conflicts like these, infantry are the most important things you can have, since drones and jets and tanks can’t patrol or build fobs or roads or negotiate with locals, or raid ammo caches like infantry can

Israel beat the shit out of all it's neighbors simultaneously multiple times with very little industrial capacity, Vietnam and Afghanistan aren't known for their industrial output either. Industrial capacity doesn't mean shit if you're just churning out garbage either.

Logistics is a fucking must unless you intend to be one of the endless bitch tier nations that can barely defend their own boarders.

Tactical training and a clear motivating objective will do the rest.

The thing is, Vietnam kept fighting and we couldn’t invade the north, so that’s almost as good as constant industry, since they could forever levy peasants to fight. And afganistan was “won”, but the tribal culture of the people makes it so that protracted guerrilla wars are really easy for them to commit to

As much as I'd like to agree that asians and arabs are in-human things. Endlessly shitting out children you don't give a fuck about being killed =/= Industrial capacity.

ask Germany

Logistics

Coherent forces (organization/logistics/leadership) with economic and technological advantages.

Attached: 12341324.jpg (1270x953, 624K)

Israel has only ever won because papi USA/UN and drunk uncle Ivan have been standing nearby ready to break up the kids if the game doesn't go the right way.
48 and 73 being material examples, 67 being a political example (ok here's the cease fire we all agreed to that the Arabs are respecting and the Israelis are ignoring but we'll just ignore that). Hell even the UN observers during 67 fucked with Jordanian equipment just to keep Israeli momentum rolling along.

But the game did go the right way for them. In actual combat they were able to beat arguably superior soviet equipment with largely obsolete and hand me down western kit, with the possible exception of their air power. It goes to show tech doesn't trump strategy and tactics. Soft power is still power.

>Numbers
>Superior military strategy
>Superior tech
Strategy can do a far better job of removing the benefits of numbers than vice versa. After all, which is better, a Phyrric victory or its inverse? Tech really only matters in wars which go on unacceptably long, unless someone figures out some really out-of-left-field weapon that changes everything instantly.
Logistics is always useful, and more never hurts.

>USSR would have won with another month of combat.
USSR stopped existing before Finland, Russkies BTFO

Attached: Rome.jpg (1572x1920, 196K)

Tech. A single person could operate a drone that could wipe out an entire platoon.

logistics

Depends on how big the number is and how advanced the tech is compared to the enemy.

Well consider those wars. They weren’t won or lost by conventional means. It was simply a case of morale loss because American troops had to shoot the same retard over and over again until they just didn’t want to shoot anymore. Not exactly comparable to say ww2 or korea

numbers then tactics

forgot meth

This.

An army marches on its stomach. Think about that phrase as it relates to supply lines, then examine how many Burger Kings the United States can drop air drop into a warzone. It's a breathtaking war machine.

Logistics

All things being equal- the force that can keep their soldiers armed, mobilized, fed and paid better than the enemy will likely win the war.

Logistics and tactics.
>Brings up a war won in spite on incompetency
>USSR would have won
USSR did win.

Killing all the other fuckers first

Attached: Frank 1.jpg (822x1280, 556K)

>USSR would have won with another month of combat.

The USSR was the victor in the Winter War, friend.

All you're saying is that air power supercedes land power by a large margin. We all know this already.