Numerical Superiority Is Not Necessary for Victory in War, Provided That...

Wayne S. Smith from the Center for International Policy stated that a fundamental principle of war is that the attacking force should be numerically superior to the defending force. Looking at the history of recent wars, if we return to the Mexican-American War of 1846, we see that the U.S. forces, which were in an offensive position and often had fewer troops than Mexico, emerged victorious two years later. In the First Gulf War, approximately 500,000 coalition forces faced 90,000 Iraqi troops. At the critical and decisive moment of the Second World War known as 'D-Day,' 176,000 Allied troops landed on the beaches of Nazi Germany; however, in the early days of the large attack, one-third of these forces had landed and were established, and their number was less than the Seventh Army of Germany. The wars between Israel and the Arabs demonstrate that this phenomenon is not unique to the United States. Military superiority is more than just numbers and can result from better training, the ratio of forces to the space they occupy, battle plans, leadership, or technology. Mr. Smith's opinion that since President Bush and his senior advisors have never been on the battlefield, the leadership of the war should be left to generals, violates the most fundamental principle of war: war is always a political act and therefore must be led by the government; this principle comes from Carl von Clausewitz, the great theorist of war. Perhaps Mr. Smith thinks that Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt should have also withdrawn from leading the wars they successfully conducted because neither had enough combat experience.