![]() And as military technology, including that of tanks, motor vehicles, aircraft and radios, was developed during the 1920s and 30s, so it was grafted onto this doctrinal framework. This doctrine integrated the operational-level ideas taught by Schlieffen with the tactical concepts developed during World War One. Guderain recognised the importance of tanks In 1914, German units inevitably outfought their opponents whenever they encountered each other on the battlefield. Schlieffen and his successor, Helmuth von Moltke the Younger, trained the German army well in what they termed Bewegungskrieg, or 'war of manoeuvre'. Above all else, this doctrine created aggressive and flexible leaders. Recognising that battlefield conditions changed rapidly and that orders often became overtaken by events, the German army encouraged its commanders to make decisions without waiting for orders from above, thus allowing them to take advantage of fleeting opportunities as they arose. To accomplish this, he advocated the use of the flexible command system pioneered by Helmuth von Moltke the Elder. In other words, he foresaw the need to maintain the initiative. Schlieffen also stressed the need to keep the enemy reacting to German moves. ![]() This doctrine stressed speed of manoeuvre and attacking the enemy where he was weakest, and usually this meant attacking the flanks. Schlieffen set about creating a doctrine that would allow the outnumbered German army to outfight its opponents. Always outnumbered by its enemies, it would have to match quantity with quality. Thus, in order to win, Schlieffen knew the German army would have to defeat its opponents quickly and decisively. And German strategists, most notably Alfred von Schlieffen, had concluded that Germany could not win a long, protracted war against such opposition. Schlieffen's doctrine formed the basis of 'blitzkrieg'īefore 1914-18, Germany had perceived itself as surrounded by enemies who were superior both in numbers and resources. Thus between 10 May and 21 June 1940, the Wehrmacht had accomplished what the army of Kaiser Wilhelm II had not managed to do in four years of desperate fighting in World War One. His well-trained and organised troops had also caused France's Allies, in the form of the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), to beat an ignominious retreat from continental Europe. It had taken only a few short weeks for the Wehrmacht (the German army), under his control, to crush the army of the French Third Republic. He was in a good position to dictate such terms. In one of history's great ironies, Hitler insisted that the armistice be signed in the very railway car in which Germany had been compelled to admit defeat at the end of World War One. In the course of the negotiations Pétain - victor of the battle of Verdun in World War One - agreed to cede three-fifths of French territory to German control. Helson served as Danchenko’s handler from 2017 through 2020, a time period in which Danchenko was a paid “confidential human source” for the FBI.On 21 June 1940, early in the second year of World War Two, the French president, Marshall Philippe Pétain, sued for peace with Adolf Hitler's Third Reich. In that respect, Helson’s testimony mirrored that of the first FBI witness, analyst Brian Auten, who contradicted the prosecution theory that Danchenko fabricated interactions with one of his supposed sub-sources, Sergei Millian. Helson, though, offered largely positive assessments of his interviews with Danchenko when he was cross-examined by Danchenko’s attorneys. As it turned out, the FBI used the allegations in the dossier to obtain a surveillance warrant against a Trump campaign staffer, Carter Page. Prosecutors say Danchenko should have been more forthcoming about his own sources and that if he had done so, the FBI would not have treated the dossier as credulously as it did. The “Steele dossier” contained numerous allegations about connections between Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Kremlin, and also included allegations of salacious sexual activity that Trump supposedly engaged in at a Moscow hotel. (AP) - A Russian-born analyst who provided the bulk of the information for a flawed dossier about former President Donald Trump told an FBI agent he was shocked and dismayed that the speculative information he provided was portrayed as fact, an agent testified Thursday.įBI agent Kevin Helson is the second bureau employee to testify at the trial of Igor Danchenko, who’s accused of lying to the FBI about his own sources for the information he passed on to British spy Christopher Steele. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.ĪLEXANDRIA, Va. This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |