Talk:Counterattack

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

[edit] Details

The general description here doesn't look quite right. It needs a bit of a more disciplined description with reference to at least one source (Clausewitz?). Off the top of my head, some important concepts that are not covered:

• Attackers are most vulnerable immediately after a successful attack
• Conventional tactics are to attack through the objective, and rendezvous in an all-round defence behind it
• Attacking forces should be followed by fresh elements to immediately secure the objective and take up its defence
• Defending elements are not likely to be able to counterattack, since they have just been defeated
• Defending formations should maintain a reserve in the rear for the counterattack
• A defence in depth is also superior in making the attack difficult and allowing counterattack

Of course this is just part of the picture. This belongs to both the topics of military defence, and military attack, which latter article is completely absent. —Michael Z. 2007-07-29 20:47 Z