About Patrick Shrier

I own this site see my About me page

The Battle of Jena-Auerstädt: 14 Oct 1806

Posted on February 19, 2012 by Patrick Shrier

The Battle of Jena-Auerstädt was fought in Germany on 1806 between the French Imperial Army and the Prussian Royal Army. It is actually two separate battles separated by about twenty miles. Both the French and Prussian armies were split leading to two separate engagements one was fought by Napoleon and Davout commanded the French Corps at Auerstädt. The battle at Jena was the larger of the two as far as forces involved are concerned but the action at Auerstädt was operationally the more decisive. Combined, the Prussians suffered a devastating defeat that they could not recover from and led to the virtual surrender of the kingdom in the face of Napoleons demands at Tilsit a little over three months later. It is simpler to look at the two engagements separately and then talk about the way the twin defeats affected the Prussians and French. One of the important things about the battle is the impetus to reform given to the Prussians after their defeat. They went to war against Napoleon in 1805 with an army that was essentially unchanged in structure and doctrine from the one Frederick II had used fifty years previously during the invasion of Silesia and Seven Years War.

Relative locations of the engagements on 14 Oct 1806

I will discuss the Battle at Jena to begin with. Not only were there more forces engaged there, that was where Napoleon was in command. Some sources claim Napoleon displayed his typical brilliance at Jena, I am not so sure. The fighting at Jena began early in the morning and continued through the afternoon. The Prussians pressed attacks home but they were continually thrown back by French artillery fire. The Prussians also suffered from the effect of the fire from French skirmishers.1 The decisive moment at Jena was when several commanders of the Prussian left were killed or wounded. This led to the collapse of that flank and after that it was all over except for the crying as the saying goes. The French pressed their advantage and this led to a Prussian retreat all along their front that quickly started to look like a rout, especially once the French cavalry started attacking and pursuing the retreating Prussians.

The battle at Auerstädt some 12 Kilometers north of the main battle at Jena was a slightly different affair but the results in the end were the same. At Auerstädt, the Prussians actually had numerical superiority and could have perhaps avoided complete defeat if their senior commanders had actually worked together instead of at cross purposes. Marshall Davout commanded the French forces and he handled his troops extremely well. He was also assisted by the overall greater unity of command in the French army. Davout achieved a defensive victory and then followed it up with an offensive late in the day that caused the Prussian army to essentially rout and leave the field in a rush.

The Prussian army was pretty much destroyed as a fighting force after Jena-Auerstädt. The French literally had their way with Prussia over the next two months as the remnants of the Prussian army fought several small delaying actions as the bulk of the army attempted to escape to the east and safety in Russia along with the Prussian king. That destruction, wand the consequent elimination of Prussia from the Second Coalition was the greatest effect of the battle. The long-term consequence was that Prussia significantly reformed their army and was in a position less than seven years later to be instrumental in the final coalition to defeat napoleon both in the 1813 campaign and again at Waterloo at the end of the Hundred Days.

Resources:

A good resource with driving guides if you happen to visit the battlefield can be found at www.Napoleon.org

One of these days, I am going to actually take the time to drive the hour and a half from my house to the battlefield and do an in-depth analysis with photos. Nevertheless, like everything else, I am hampered by time. When I do, I will be sure to post an update to the relatively broad, operational/strategic analysis presented here. My real love is the tactical side of military history anyway.

1. Cark, Christopher, Iron Kingdom: The Rise and Downfall of Prussia, 1600-1947. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press 2006. 296-298

Periodic Iran Craziness Update

Posted on February 17, 2012 by Patrick Shrier

Links to articles of interest about Irans continuing hijinks and the World’s response.

Intel Official: Iranian Missiles Could Hit Nearby U.S. Targets, Europe, Now what would happen were Iran to launch a missile at Israel or a US warship? At this point I am only certian that if they hit Israel, Iran would regret it.

Thailand: Iranians’ targets were Israeli diplomats, Aparrently the Iranians are not so good at actually carrying out Terrorist attacks as the three essentially failed attacks in India, Georgia, and Thailand this week show. Perhaps they should have got some of their Hezbollah puppets support. On the plus side, if these attacks were carried by members of the Iranian elite, perhaps the West does not have as much to worry about as it thinks.

Iran Says It’s Victim in Nuclear Showdown, This one is just funny, Iran is the victim? I wonder if the left will buy this hook, line, and sinker? We are being kind of mean to the mullahs aren’t we, by telling them to not build nukes and be open about their nuclear research. The Iranians could actually avoid a lot of trouble if they were not so secretive. However, generally if you act like you have something to hide, you do.

Panetta: No Iranian decision yet on nukes, and then we have the waffling, weasel wording defense secretary. Who oh, by the way is complicit in the Obama plan to actually start reducing the size of the military while we are actually in the middle of a war.

Hue and cry on Iran’s nukes, Lastly, the other sides view or at least the words of a Pakistani apologist.

The Developing Situation with Iran – The Craziness Continues

Posted on February 16, 2012 by Patrick Shrier

I don’t necessarily want to make a habit of talking contemporary issues on a regular basis but the events in, around, and about Iran over the past few weeks have really got me thinking. There are a couple of points I would like to bring up.

The US administration and European leaders don’t seem to really have a clue what they are doing. They keep making statements about what they will not tolerate, and hen tolerate it anyway. This has been going on for years and on the US side started with the Clinton administration as far as I can see. A clear line has not been drawn and stuck to, that is probably the root of Iran’s boldness, they have not really been held to account for ignoring the West’s concerns. It also helps that they have the backing of Russia and China. Unless and until the West grows a spine, Iran will continue to defy them. Concrete measures need to be taken, a sow of force more impressive than an aircraft carrier moving into the Gulf. I am thinking something along the lines of “Gunboat Diplomacy” here.
Russia and China, what do they get out of support for Iran other than sticking it to the West? I don’t detect anything other than spite on the part of both nations. They have just as much to lose by the existence of a nuclear armed Iran as the West or do they really think they can control the Mullahs in Tehran?
Israel. Except for Iran, Israel is the wild card. They will do what they think they have to do to protect themselves. The bombing attacks aginst Israeli targets over the last few days increase the risk of Israeli action. What is Iran trying to do here, actually provoke an attack by Israel? That would be a mistake on Iran’s part. A nuclear Iran is the nightmare scenario for Israel and they will not allow that to come to pass. I can almost see US and Israeli planes getting into a shooting match over an Israeli strike on Israel because the administration does not have the balls to do what the Israelis have said they will do. Do not doubt that Israel will act when they feel it is necessary. Lastly, we should not forget that Israel is also an undeclared nuclear power in their own right. There is a probably a powderkeg right there we don’t to see lit.
The rest of the Middle East. I am very curious to see the results of the Arab Spring of ’12. I almost expect to see the UAR resurrected. It seems apparent that fundamentalists, if not outright Jihadists are coming to power in both Egypt and Libya. That does not bode well for results in Syria. The ironic part of that is Obama and Europe are definitely not getting the results they said they would. The conservative Cassandra’s of last spring, me included, seem to be getting vindicated with the rise of Islamist politicians in the post revolt countries.

I think if things keep going the way they are, we will see some sort of military exchange with Iran this year. I am guessing that Iran will start it. I don’t think they are bluffing about trying to shut down the Straight of Hormuz and it makes me wonder how far along there nuclear program really is? It would be bad for us if there first nuclear test was in a boat anywhere near the US 5th Fleet. I am not even certain that Obama and Co. would react to an act like that as forcefully as they should.

The situation certainly bears watching. We are indeed living in “interesting times.” I think I am going to start reposting stuff here about Iran over the next few months to keep my readers abreast of what is going on.

The Recent Furor over Catholics and Contraception

Posted on February 13, 2012 by Patrick Shrier

I felt compelled to post something about the current furor in the States between the Catholic Church and the Government over the announced mandate to force the church to cover contraception in contravention of church beliefs and doctrine. I will say up front that I am Catholic and support eh church in its position.

Firstly, I keep reading comments on articles about the controversy to the extent that Catholics should shut up and comply because not every employee of Catholic hospitals is Catholic. To which I respond that accepting a job at any organization is a choice and you cannot convince me that employees of Catholic institutions do not know the type of organization they work for.

Second, The US Conference of Catholic Bishops is 100% correct when they state that the HHS contraception mandate is an infringement of religious liberty. As the debate heats up and the secular-humanist types get more vociferous in their denouncement of Catholic for denying women the choice to kill their babies I am increasingly reminded of the famous pen by Martin Niemöller:

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn’t a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

The assault on religion in American, and Western, life continues. If no one stands up as the Catholic bishops are now doing, what kind of world do people of faith face in 20 or 30 years. I read many more heartfelt obituaries about Christopher Hitchens from the left than I ever did about Pope John Paul II from that same left media. Religion is under assault in the Western world, at least Christianity itself is, if not other, eastern and more mystic or violent faiths.

Update 14 February: There is an excellent analysis piece of this controversy by Charles Kadlec at the Forbes website: The Audacity of Power: President Obama Vs. The Catholic Church

Book Review: A Desert Called Peace by Tom Kratman

Posted on February 11, 2012 by Patrick Shrier

I have reviewed several of Mr Kratman’s books so far and this is another one. I have read all of his books before and find myself going back and rereading them while I wait for the next to come out. Kratman is one of those authors that makes me wish people could write as fast I can read so I would not have to wait so long in between books. Since they cannot, I settle for rereading what they have already published, Kratman’s work is well worth reading and A Desert Called Peace is no exception.

The book is a thinly veiled recitation of what could happen to the earth. Essentially, a NASA probe discovered a rift in space that led to another habitable planet. The UN and all its lefty lackeys saw this as a golden opportunity to get rid of all the barbaric conservatives and send them to a new world. The book itslef opens 450 years later with an Islamic inspired attack reminiscent of 9/11. The US analogs reaction is roughly the same with the stunning difference that a group of mercenaries is hired to supplement the national armies. These mercenaries, the Legion del Cid, were founded by a man who lost family in the initial attacks and wants revenge. They prove to be ruthless appliers of the Law of War and pacify their sector fairly quickly while avoiding the administrative mistakes of the national armies.

The book is essentially the story of the pacification of Sumer, an Iraq analog. The constant back-story of the UN and its subjugation of earth is interesting and gives he reaer an idea of where the whole series is heading. The excitement of the book is not knowing exactly what will happen next while having an idea. Mr. Kratman’s descriptions of combat are spot on and he moves the plot along quite well such that the reader is never bored.

This is the first book in the Legion series and almost all of the sequels are just as good. This is book is worth reading more than once as the story stays fresh. The caveat is that if you are one of those people that believes in the brotherhood of man and the “why can’t we all just get along” sappiness you probably wont like this book. Then again, this book is somewhat targeted at soft brained people like that in the first place. I will be reviewing the rest of his books as I reread them in expectation of the next installment of the series.