Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Sherman Logan

“A linear wall is useless if breached at any point. Whereas a series of strongpoints can be held and used as bases for a counterattack.”

True, if the threat is purely military. But some studies of The Great Wall and Hadrian’s Wall suggest that these barriers served as a kind of “customs station” where tariffs could be assessed and the like. In this way these ancient walls served more like a modern border crossing.


17 posted on 09/06/2013 2:14:08 PM PDT by Tallguy (Hunkered down in Pennsylvania)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: Tallguy

Oh, I agree. But people who haven’t thought about it often believe these walls were meant as military “stop the invasion cold” barriers.

Whereas anybody who’s given them any thought will realize they absolutely cannot function that way.

The classic example of course is the Maginot Line. What would the correlation of forces in the Battle of France have been had the resources poured into the ML gone instead into tanks and planes?

Actually, I suspect it wouldn’t have mattered. France collapsed more out of spiritual malaise than from being physically overpowered. More tanks and planes would not have helped.


18 posted on 09/06/2013 2:30:03 PM PDT by Sherman Logan (Mark Steyn: "In the Middle East, the enemy of our enemy is also our enemy.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson