• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The RUSI journal >On Sieges
【24h】

On Sieges

机译：论胜利

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Any discussion of war that does not account for sieges is incomplete. Sieges loom large in strategy and decisions in modern war. While sieges might not be where policymakers, strategists and practitioners want to focus funding or research and development, the nature of war in the post-Soviet strategic environment suggests this is one of the primary areas in which to invest. Furthermore, there is no reason to believe that sieges are merely a flash in the pan of war. The conditions that facilitate the use of sieges in war will not be vacating the strategic environment, nor the battlefield, any time soon. Moreover, the benefits of waging a siege are high in relation to the costs, which suggests that we can expect to see sieges being used well into the future. Finally, sieges are not sunset tactical or operational approaches to warfighting, but have proven to have staying power in the wars of today's international system. More research is needed to better understand the picture of the siege's role in war. The Bosnian War, the Chechen Wars and the Syrian Civil War have had several sieges each, many of which are all but unknown outside the discrete work of historians and defence analysts. Bringing more of these sieges to light helps generate a more complete understanding of sieges, including what triggers their use, the differences between porous and impermeable sieges, the benefits and shortcomings of their use, and the frequency of decisiveness in their use. Moreover, consensus needs to be reached on how police-sourced counter-siege operations fit within the discussion. To be sure, some of these sieges, such as Russia's response to the siege of a school in Beslan in September 2004, fall outside existing frameworks. Making progress in understanding sieges in modern war will better prepare policymakers, strategists and practitioners for all instances in which they arise.
机译：任何不考虑围攻的战争的讨论是不完整的。在现代战争中的战略和决策中筛分纹理。虽然围攻可能不是政策制定者，战略家和从业者想要集中资金或研发的地方，但在苏联后战略环境中的战争性质表明这是投资的主要领域之一。此外，没有理由相信围攻仅仅是泛战中的闪光。有助于在战争中使用围攻的条件将不会在任何时候腾出战略环境，也不是战场。此外，与成本有关的发动围攻的好处是高度的，这表明我们可以期望看到围攻融入未来。最后，围攻不是落日战术或战争的操作方法，但已被证明在今天国际制度的战争中持有权力。需要更多的研究来更好地了解围攻在战争中的角色的图片。波斯尼亚战争，车臣战争和叙利亚内战已经有几次围攻，其中许多历史学家和国防分析师的离散工作之外都是未知的。带来更多这些潜在的光线有助于产生更完全的理解筛，包括触发器的使用，多孔和不透水围攻之间的差异，它们使用的好处和缺点以及它们使用的衰变频率。此外，需要达成共识，即如何在讨论中适应如何符合警察的反围攻运营。要确定，其中一些围攻，例如俄罗斯于2004年9月在Beslan在Beslan围攻Bessge的回应，落在现有框架之外。在现代战争中了解围攻的进展将更好地为他们所产生的所有实例做好准备决策者，策略家和从业者。

著录项

  • 来源
    《The RUSI journal》 |2021年第2期|18-28|共11页
  • 作者

    Amos Fox;

  • 作者单位

    US Army;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号