SM Stirling's and David Drake's General Raj Whitehall risks his life in battle. Should a supreme commander do this? We have already asked this question in:
1805-1815
War In History And Future History
- where our examples were taken from past history guarded by the Time Patrol and future history as recounted in the History of Technic Civilization. Both previous posts are illustrated by the death of Nelson.
(Look at that dog on the cover of Conqueror.)
1 comment:
Kaor, Paul!
Whether army or fleet commanders should personally endanger their lives in actual combat depends on, to use the word Trotsky applied to the early Red Army, "circumstances." In Raj Whitehall's time on Bellevue, Civil Government armies seemed to have expected their commanders to share front line dangers. Also, the technology did not yet exist on Bellevue allowing for the huge armies seen in the 20th century of Earth, which also made it NECESSARY for the supreme commander to not needlessly risk his life, he had to remain able to think, plan, give orders and CHANGES to orders, etc.
Sean
Post a Comment