兵马未动，粮草先行：后勤缘何压倒战略

    在布迪安斯基的书中，大西洋海战可谓是布莱克特战争的主战场，而他也是夺取最后胜利不可或缺的关键。作为曾写过密码破译历史畅销书的作者，布迪安斯基讲述了一段精彩的历史，即位于布莱切里公园的英国密码破译中心所破译的情报外加布莱克特的运筹学如何破解和摧毁了纳粹德国的“狼群战术”。

    布迪安斯基叙述的中心就是发生在潜艇、货船和战机之间的惨烈战役。当时，英国的生死存亡完全依赖于货船所提供的补给、燃料和武器，而德国的U型潜艇却不断地将它们击沉。这种状况不能再持续下去，正如温斯顿•丘吉尔在他的回忆录中写的：“大西洋海战是整个二战的决定性战役。”

    在肯尼迪的书中，大西洋海战也是被从头至尾地深入分析了一通。这场战役是全书的第一章，他明确地指出这场海战胜利中的战略因素。在肯尼迪的书中，新式武器系统、货船战术以及战斗机在货船易受攻击区域巡逻的警示作用比布莱克特和布莱切里密码破译中心所发挥的作用要更大。

    “在这个独特的案例中，我们一次又一次地看到各种资源的‘合理利用’给了前线部队以获胜的武器，”肯尼迪写道。“我们也不止一次地看出，更先进的应用在何处成为战争转折点的时机，某个想法在何处变成现实，哪些人或组织是处于负责地位，以及他们所实现的技术突破是如何直接影响到战场上的战况。”

    这个主题经常出现在肯尼迪对后勤创新在两栖登陆战、空战、对抗希特勒的闪电战以及大西洋战役的全面分析之中。每个章节都是独立的，但是它们整合成书的累积效应就与肯尼迪在核心观点相一致，即第二次世界大战的赢家是那些“在‘情报应用’中处于优势的一方。”

    但是坦白说，肯尼迪的看法和结论似乎与他笼统地战略至上的观点相矛盾，也就是说，这些战略内在性地需要“更先进的应用”、“某些想法”以及“突破”。没有实力作为支撑的战略只是一种期许和愿望而已。

    帕特里克•布莱克特和肯尼迪书中那些无名英雄们的力量就在于他们区分了描绘一种尖端科技与将之创造出来之间的不同。正如H•G•威尔士经典科幻小说《时间机器》（The Time Machine）中的莫洛克斯族一样，当埃洛伊族人却整天琢磨些高深的理论的时候，他们却在默默地辛勤劳动。无论是思想上还是内心中，他们都明白，创造出新的工具与技术可以催生出新的能力，而这种能力进而可以使得他们制定出成功的战略。而这就是为什么，成功的领导者都会将后勤的重要性置于战略之上。（财富中文网）

    译者：唐昕昕

    In Budiansky's telling, the Battle of the Atlantic was the main front of Blackett's war, and he was indispensable to winning it. The author of a well-received history of code-breaking, Budiansky provides a wonderful revisionist history of how intelligence derived from Bletchley Park's breakthroughs combined with Blackett's operational research to bypass and destroy the Nazi Wolfpacks.

    This brutal war between submarines, convoys, and aircraft is the heart of Budiansky's narrative. The convoys that fed, fueled, and armed Britain were essential to her survival. The U-boats were killing them. They had to be stopped. As Winston Churchill observed in his memoir: "The Battle of the Atlantic was the dominating factor all through the war."

    The Battle of the Atlantic also enjoys a thorough and incisive retelling in Kennedy's Engineers. It's the first of his thematic chapters, and he crisply identifies the strategic factors that went into winning it. In Kennedy's story, Blackett and Bletchley Park play less of a role than new weapons systems, convoy tactics, and aircraft to "mind the gap" at sea where convoys were must vulnerable.

    "Time and time again in this particular story we see how the 'proper application' of resources led to endeavors that gave the frontline forces the instruments for winning," Kennedy observes, "Time and time again, too, we can identify where the newer application became turning points: where a certain idea was turned into reality, which people and/or organizations were responsible and how their breakthroughs directly affected the field of battle."

    This leitmotif appears frequently in Kennedy's comprehensive analyses of logistical innovation in amphibious landings, the air war, confronting Hitler's Blitzkrieg, and the war in the Pacific. Each chapter can stand alone, but their cumulative impact lends coherence to his central argument that the Second World War "was won by the 'intelligent application' of superior force."

    But Kennedy's insights and conclusions frankly seem at odds with his more broad and sweeping generalizations celebrating strategy. To wit, these strategies inherently required the "newer applications" and "certain ideas" and "breakthroughs" to occur. Strategy without capability is nothing but a hope and an aspiration.

    The power of a Patrick Blackett and of the unsung heroes whom Kennedy celebrates is that they grasp the distinction between describing an edge and creating one. Like the Morlocks in H.G. Wells' science-fiction classic The Time Machine, they stay below doing real work while the Eloi gambol about thinking grand thoughts. Both intellectually and viscerally, they understand that creating new tools and technologies can spawn new capabilities that in turn enable successful strategies. And that, in the end, is why successful leaders tend to prioritize logistics over strategy.