The military theorist, Baron de Jomini, best characterizes the nature of World War I. Quote Jomini theorized that “the offensive is nearly always advantageous.” One of Jomini’s key tenants is that victory is obtained through “offensive action to mass forces against weaker enemy forces at some decisive point.” That “the attack itself is essential; the initiative must not be left to the enemy” and that the commander must hurl all available forces against these decisive points and pursue the enemy relentlessly: “massing, attacking, persisting.” In contrast, Carl von Clausewitz reasoned defensive warfare “is intrinsically stronger than the offensive,” and “simply the more effective form of war” and means to victory. Yet, Jomini would counter that “He who awaits the attack is everywhere anticipated: the enemy fall with large force upon fractions of his force: he neither knows where his adversary proposes to attack him nor in what manner to repel him.” Defenders “let the enemy …show more content…
The Schlieffen plan ultimately failed. The French successfully counterattacked and in the battle of the Marne, was able to repulse the German attack and open a gap in the German’s First and Second Armies. Interestingly, the Allies failure to push the offensive, take the initiative, and pursue the enemy, as Jomini would have advocated, and thereby, missed an opportunity to destroy the German right wing. However, the failure of the Schlieffen plan may be found in Germany’s failure to hurl all of its forces against this decisive point. Prior to the French counterattack, the Germans had already ordered the withdrawal of two army corps from the Western Front and redirected them towards the east. Additionally, the Schlieffen plan failed to develop a sufficient logistic plan to supply and sustain the German troops invading far in to Belgium and France. This error also demonstrates a departure from the Jomini school of thought, which places great significance on