Star Wars : A Strategic Analisys
By guru wsam, in response to the following question :
What I'd like to know is, If Obi-wan was able to chop up Anakin because he had the "high ground" in #3, then how was he able to chop Darth Maul in half when Maul had the high ground in #1?
Answer me that!
Answer: Many strategists have assumed defence to be superior than offense. However, the battle scenes in Star Wars clearly demonstrate this is not the case.
Remember the battle in Empire Strikes Back on Hoth? The Rebels were unable to hold a prepared position, deeply fortified and armed. Against what? A mobile force with no forward base and no logistical support whatsoever. Incredible! Ridiculous! It is like he is trying to rewrite 1930's French strategic doctrine into a whole mythologized universe.
Do I even need to get into the Death Star? It is a metal Star of Death. But the Rebels overtake it. Impossible. Time and again we see the defensive failing where it should prevail. In Star Wars Lucas seems intent on throwing elementary strategic theory on its head.
As you noted with the long understood and normally considered unproblematic concept of the 'high ground'. Lucas fails to utlilize the high ground in a consistent manner. First it provides advantage, then it doesn't. Why bother having an airforce? At first glance it might seem that this represents George Lucas and Lucasfilm entering the debate on a National Missile Defence Shield. If Defence is so weak, if the high ground doesn't yield advantage, then why bother?
But it becomes unavoidable that this is what he wants you to think. You are actually being duped. Believing this is like leaving The Usual Suspects before the final denoucement. Lucas has encoded a Struassianesque system of secret knowledge into his films, which only true believers understand. Like, God is Dead, but different.
Also, through the careful use of Frued and the Oedipal Complex he spreads his message through the manipulation of the unconscious. On the deeper level, where the serious meta-analyis happens, it is obvious his arguement is actually part of an ominious neo-con, Rumsfeldian game. Stick with me. I'm going to have to go fast. It's simple propaganda, to teach this generation that the old strategic rules no longer apply. At a basic level this is nothing more than that old canard: anything is possible. Just 'use the force'? A coincidence the slogan is so close to 'Just do it'? Nike = Athena. The Offensive, you get it?
All information is relevant. I had brunch on Sunday and a kid wearing an acrylic Darth Vader mask sat at the table next to me. Then his mum made him take it off. Does that mean anything? Probably not. But when dealing with Lucas one cannot be too careful.
Then we get to the socio-scientific-military level. The movies' arguments are designed to instruct an unwitting population that the recent, much heralded, transformation of warfare is as profound as when Napoleon first concentrated masses of troops to strike a decisive blow against the Prussian crown. As profound as the invention of modern drill in the 16th Century. Lucas is doing the bidding of his masters in the Bush Administration. Obviously for when they announce the invasion of Turkey, using only a marine troop and two ambulances painted with green and red camo. Then they plan to invade Eygpt with a rubber band, three rusty salad forks Wolfowitz found at a garage sale in Baltimore and several dozen area high school students with night vision googles, but no batteries. A couple more Star Wars spin-offs and why not? We will readily accept anything. They will attempt to solve the deficit through advertising. Remember the 'Use the Force'/ 'Just do It' syntaxical conflageration? Hmmm. If Anikan can defeat a jedhi horde by staring at them really hard then why not invade Mongolia armed with only a toothpick, and backed up by three nervous file clerks suffering from chronic overbite. An acne-prone twenty-something with a sling shot and one carrier pigeon for a command post. Who can argue? At least they're trying to invade countries. What countries are you trying to invade? None. It's tricky to understand, but then when you do, it becomes obvious what Lucas is up to. He wants Canada's water. It's so obvious.
wsam
What I'd like to know is, If Obi-wan was able to chop up Anakin because he had the "high ground" in #3, then how was he able to chop Darth Maul in half when Maul had the high ground in #1?
Answer me that!
Answer: Many strategists have assumed defence to be superior than offense. However, the battle scenes in Star Wars clearly demonstrate this is not the case.
Remember the battle in Empire Strikes Back on Hoth? The Rebels were unable to hold a prepared position, deeply fortified and armed. Against what? A mobile force with no forward base and no logistical support whatsoever. Incredible! Ridiculous! It is like he is trying to rewrite 1930's French strategic doctrine into a whole mythologized universe.
Do I even need to get into the Death Star? It is a metal Star of Death. But the Rebels overtake it. Impossible. Time and again we see the defensive failing where it should prevail. In Star Wars Lucas seems intent on throwing elementary strategic theory on its head.
As you noted with the long understood and normally considered unproblematic concept of the 'high ground'. Lucas fails to utlilize the high ground in a consistent manner. First it provides advantage, then it doesn't. Why bother having an airforce? At first glance it might seem that this represents George Lucas and Lucasfilm entering the debate on a National Missile Defence Shield. If Defence is so weak, if the high ground doesn't yield advantage, then why bother?
But it becomes unavoidable that this is what he wants you to think. You are actually being duped. Believing this is like leaving The Usual Suspects before the final denoucement. Lucas has encoded a Struassianesque system of secret knowledge into his films, which only true believers understand. Like, God is Dead, but different.
Also, through the careful use of Frued and the Oedipal Complex he spreads his message through the manipulation of the unconscious. On the deeper level, where the serious meta-analyis happens, it is obvious his arguement is actually part of an ominious neo-con, Rumsfeldian game. Stick with me. I'm going to have to go fast. It's simple propaganda, to teach this generation that the old strategic rules no longer apply. At a basic level this is nothing more than that old canard: anything is possible. Just 'use the force'? A coincidence the slogan is so close to 'Just do it'? Nike = Athena. The Offensive, you get it?
All information is relevant. I had brunch on Sunday and a kid wearing an acrylic Darth Vader mask sat at the table next to me. Then his mum made him take it off. Does that mean anything? Probably not. But when dealing with Lucas one cannot be too careful.
Then we get to the socio-scientific-military level. The movies' arguments are designed to instruct an unwitting population that the recent, much heralded, transformation of warfare is as profound as when Napoleon first concentrated masses of troops to strike a decisive blow against the Prussian crown. As profound as the invention of modern drill in the 16th Century. Lucas is doing the bidding of his masters in the Bush Administration. Obviously for when they announce the invasion of Turkey, using only a marine troop and two ambulances painted with green and red camo. Then they plan to invade Eygpt with a rubber band, three rusty salad forks Wolfowitz found at a garage sale in Baltimore and several dozen area high school students with night vision googles, but no batteries. A couple more Star Wars spin-offs and why not? We will readily accept anything. They will attempt to solve the deficit through advertising. Remember the 'Use the Force'/ 'Just do It' syntaxical conflageration? Hmmm. If Anikan can defeat a jedhi horde by staring at them really hard then why not invade Mongolia armed with only a toothpick, and backed up by three nervous file clerks suffering from chronic overbite. An acne-prone twenty-something with a sling shot and one carrier pigeon for a command post. Who can argue? At least they're trying to invade countries. What countries are you trying to invade? None. It's tricky to understand, but then when you do, it becomes obvious what Lucas is up to. He wants Canada's water. It's so obvious.
wsam
posted by alsocanadian at 9:54 AM
3 Comments:
you know, I alway thought there was something going on with Lucas!
Now if guru Wasam could only explain the Matrix.....
JP
The high ground was irrelevant in the Obi-Wan - Anikin confrontation. Obi-Wan was simply warning Anikin not to do something foolish based on overconfidence and perceived greater wisdom. Anikin chose to act anyway and the greater wisdom and patience showed by Obi-Wan allowed him to defeat a Jedi knight who was his superior in power.
This was a lesson in how the impetuosity of youth and lack of respect for the wise leads to folly. It was not a lesson in strategy and tactics.
Darth Vader kills him in the end so who's the winner now? George Lucas sucks ass anyways. I want my money back!!
Post a Comment
<< Home