The difference between a front and flanks has been well known to me for a long time. Gee, and I was just a simple senior NCO too. Still missed out on that slot for the Staff and Command College.
As a former NAVEUR/SIXTHFLT and STRKFOR NATO bubba, I am partial to a perspective that Europe, when viewed thru a maritime lens, is simply a very large peninsula. Notwithstanding, Sal, absolutely concur!
To be frank, they cannot confront the front and feel they must do a flanking maneuver by using flank in place of front, and it is frankly, an affront to frank English. The confusing of the language is their frontal assault, Pete.
One of the small things that perturbs me the most about Ukraine reporting - especially reporting by their military - is all this "in the Kharkiv direction" or "in the Donetsk direction". It makes it very difficult to even understand what they are talking about. Say, "there were small unit engagements" around a village or "there were battalion size engagements" that were oriented from A toward B - whatever - if you are talking about smaller, localized actions. Don't they have a long, continuous "front" facing the Russians from Kharkiv to Kherson, with potential flanks with Belarus and Transnistria? Isn't a movement by an army group, or subset, an offensive - the response a counterattack or a counteroffensive? It is just one of those things that makes it hard to make heads or tails of what they are doing strategically and tactically and makes one wonder if THEY know what they are doing strategically or tactically.
I'd add that in Risk the one place you don't want to have to defend is Europe. You always get your a$$ kicked if you have to defend Europe....large front, lots of flanks with potentially unfriendly neighbors. Joking....just joking.
A possible issue is that a Front, in Soviet Army terms, is a unit. It's what the US calls an Army Group. In addition, the term Strategic Direction (Russian acronym is TVD) is a term the Soviet Army used for what the US calls a Theatre of Military Operations.
No doubt and thanks for the comment. The problem with designating it as equal to a tactical or strategic theater is that they are talking about too small an area and battalion level (or smaller) actions! In terms of understanding what they are talking about, it would make it much easer to say, "Russia launched a brigade or company sized action oriented from X to Y (or along an axis or highway) with the apparent objective of taking Z." Their muddled language of "something happened out in the Southern direction around Donetsk" doesn't provide - or imply - an operational level of understanding that can be processed by people trying to evaluate what is happening (and upon which they are basing their opinions on supporting or not supporting continued aid to Ukraine).
During World War II, my mother followed the action closely, especially what was happening in Europe after D Day. She was fearful that the broad front strategy being folllowed in the fall of 1944 might result in a war of attrition in the mode of World War I.
She grew up in a household in the 1920s and 1930s where my grandmother was an ardent isolationist and my grandfather was a liberal arts professor at a small Montana technical college teaching economics, history of civilization, military history, and European history.
My aunt was an ardent internationalist at the time. My grandfather was more or less neutral but clearly recognized in 1938 that Hitler intended to refight World War I using modern technology and tactics. Much discussion occurred in that household in the late 1930s concerning where the world was headed and what role America should be playing in unfolding events.
During the war, my mother taught English and history in a small rural town in Montana. Everyone in that small town and most all of the students in its small schools had an appreciation for world geography, for world events, and for the political and social issues of the time which far exceeds anything we see today in either the teachers or their students.
In World War II and thereafter, my mother, my aunt, my grandparents, and most all the students they were teaching knew the difference between a front and a flank.
Traditional geography not the JEDI lens that the American Association of Geographers has placed on everything. Well, I guess at they have adopted the more avante garde JEDI instead of DEIA.
It was an era when every American town of any size had at least one newspaper, with a newsroom in which a group of local residents kept track of the war news. Their influence, together with that of men and women on active service or engaged in war work, maintained public awareness of world events at a sophisticated level. We seem to have outsourced all that.
The other possible reason is that they ae guilty of "Northism". That deep need to orient on the North Pole.
I think, however, that you are correct in thinking that we want to avoid hurting the Russian Feelers by saying "Eastern Front" Too many negative waves...
c.1974. My first ship’s CO kept a chart in his stateroom that was centered on the North Pole as a way of keeping us focused on our role in the big picture.
"RIGHT FULL RUDDER, ALL AHEAD FULL...astern...go left, I said." Variances in Degrees true, magnetic & relative, mills, points, named compasses points, even target angle. Not a cowl, knot a cow, knotty kale. A monk hatless, bulldogging a bull, a pithy salad. The smartest people in the room know that what you say can pin you down. Pivot, retreat, flank as necessary. Life in 2024 is a 4D chess game. Make others believe that. Tie them up in knots, nots, naughts. A wee nod to Gramsci, a genius.
Not for nothing but the chart used in Phib’s example shows, to me at least, one reason Russia acts as she does. That’s a lot of territory under NATO with American Flags on shoulder pile that is directly entrenched on Russian borders. And yet Russia all by herself is the enemy or belligerent. Hmm.
Amen!
Looks like the Maginot Line to me.
Since we are talking about words will it matter if NATO surrenders or asks for an armistice?
The difference between a front and flanks has been well known to me for a long time. Gee, and I was just a simple senior NCO too. Still missed out on that slot for the Staff and Command College.
As a former NAVEUR/SIXTHFLT and STRKFOR NATO bubba, I am partial to a perspective that Europe, when viewed thru a maritime lens, is simply a very large peninsula. Notwithstanding, Sal, absolutely concur!
Godspeed and Good Hunting Y’all!
Perhaps it's because the Germans no longer have a martial gene, let alone an excessively martial gene and it frightens them.
They no longer have a martial society. It was stamped out after starting two wars by Western, Soviet, and German propaganda efforts.
It appears the gene for self-preservation must have gone away with it. The keep Germany down campaign has succeeded.
Well, they did have two world wars which largely killed-off everyone that embodied the Prussian martial-ethic....just sayin
The language confusion is evident in the Wikipedia article on strategic flanking.
The language confusion is evident in the Wikipedia article on [fill in the blank].
To be frank, they cannot confront the front and feel they must do a flanking maneuver by using flank in place of front, and it is frankly, an affront to frank English. The confusing of the language is their frontal assault, Pete.
Wouldn't say its confusion but, mis-use.
One of the small things that perturbs me the most about Ukraine reporting - especially reporting by their military - is all this "in the Kharkiv direction" or "in the Donetsk direction". It makes it very difficult to even understand what they are talking about. Say, "there were small unit engagements" around a village or "there were battalion size engagements" that were oriented from A toward B - whatever - if you are talking about smaller, localized actions. Don't they have a long, continuous "front" facing the Russians from Kharkiv to Kherson, with potential flanks with Belarus and Transnistria? Isn't a movement by an army group, or subset, an offensive - the response a counterattack or a counteroffensive? It is just one of those things that makes it hard to make heads or tails of what they are doing strategically and tactically and makes one wonder if THEY know what they are doing strategically or tactically.
I'd add that in Risk the one place you don't want to have to defend is Europe. You always get your a$$ kicked if you have to defend Europe....large front, lots of flanks with potentially unfriendly neighbors. Joking....just joking.
A possible issue is that a Front, in Soviet Army terms, is a unit. It's what the US calls an Army Group. In addition, the term Strategic Direction (Russian acronym is TVD) is a term the Soviet Army used for what the US calls a Theatre of Military Operations.
No doubt and thanks for the comment. The problem with designating it as equal to a tactical or strategic theater is that they are talking about too small an area and battalion level (or smaller) actions! In terms of understanding what they are talking about, it would make it much easer to say, "Russia launched a brigade or company sized action oriented from X to Y (or along an axis or highway) with the apparent objective of taking Z." Their muddled language of "something happened out in the Southern direction around Donetsk" doesn't provide - or imply - an operational level of understanding that can be processed by people trying to evaluate what is happening (and upon which they are basing their opinions on supporting or not supporting continued aid to Ukraine).
During World War II, my mother followed the action closely, especially what was happening in Europe after D Day. She was fearful that the broad front strategy being folllowed in the fall of 1944 might result in a war of attrition in the mode of World War I.
She grew up in a household in the 1920s and 1930s where my grandmother was an ardent isolationist and my grandfather was a liberal arts professor at a small Montana technical college teaching economics, history of civilization, military history, and European history.
My aunt was an ardent internationalist at the time. My grandfather was more or less neutral but clearly recognized in 1938 that Hitler intended to refight World War I using modern technology and tactics. Much discussion occurred in that household in the late 1930s concerning where the world was headed and what role America should be playing in unfolding events.
During the war, my mother taught English and history in a small rural town in Montana. Everyone in that small town and most all of the students in its small schools had an appreciation for world geography, for world events, and for the political and social issues of the time which far exceeds anything we see today in either the teachers or their students.
In World War II and thereafter, my mother, my aunt, my grandparents, and most all the students they were teaching knew the difference between a front and a flank.
War is the Lord's way to get us to pay attention to geography.
Traditional geography not the JEDI lens that the American Association of Geographers has placed on everything. Well, I guess at they have adopted the more avante garde JEDI instead of DEIA.
It was an era when every American town of any size had at least one newspaper, with a newsroom in which a group of local residents kept track of the war news. Their influence, together with that of men and women on active service or engaged in war work, maintained public awareness of world events at a sophisticated level. We seem to have outsourced all that.
The other possible reason is that they ae guilty of "Northism". That deep need to orient on the North Pole.
I think, however, that you are correct in thinking that we want to avoid hurting the Russian Feelers by saying "Eastern Front" Too many negative waves...
c.1974. My first ship’s CO kept a chart in his stateroom that was centered on the North Pole as a way of keeping us focused on our role in the big picture.
Ill take "giggles from a childhood watching Hogans Heroes for $500, Alex"!!
North ATLANTIC Treaty Organization. Okay then, a wee nod to all our Naughty-kal denizens here:
AHEAD, ASTERN, PORT, 'n STARBOARD! ( w/ Variances in Degrees)
"RIGHT FULL RUDDER, ALL AHEAD FULL...astern...go left, I said." Variances in Degrees true, magnetic & relative, mills, points, named compasses points, even target angle. Not a cowl, knot a cow, knotty kale. A monk hatless, bulldogging a bull, a pithy salad. The smartest people in the room know that what you say can pin you down. Pivot, retreat, flank as necessary. Life in 2024 is a 4D chess game. Make others believe that. Tie them up in knots, nots, naughts. A wee nod to Gramsci, a genius.
Not for nothing but the chart used in Phib’s example shows, to me at least, one reason Russia acts as she does. That’s a lot of territory under NATO with American Flags on shoulder pile that is directly entrenched on Russian borders. And yet Russia all by herself is the enemy or belligerent. Hmm.
This is like little kids in school at the planitarium the first time. Ask them to point north and they almost all point forward.
heavens, we can't hurt Russia's fefes! They might get butt hurt and attack some unsuspecting nation... Oh, Wait.
Oh, what the hell, let’s do it anyway.
Roger that.
If they talked about the Eastern Front they might have to consider how porous their Southern Front currently is
I discovered that consensus was paramount at NATO not actually accomplishing anything.