(8 of 9)
Professionals criticize the free lances for using popular stereotypes (the "robot" Germans, the "individualistic" French, the "cowardly wops," the "bemused" Russians). They point out that before the World War the German Imperial Army was drilled to the teeth, yet the German mechanical marvel did not fall apart before the attacks of the "individualistic" French and British. Always good military technicians, the Germans teach their men infiltration tactics, stress individualist action by small groups of soldiers, encourage initiative all through the ranks.
One of the sharpest differences of opinion is over air-strength. The claims of the British to a superior air personnel are dismissed by the professionals as fantastic. Aviation, the professionals say, is a young man's game; hence a lack of good pilots in the early-thirty age brackets is not critical. Free-lance figures for British and French air strength are judged far too high. Free lance authorities set British monthly plane replacement capacity at 600, professionals say it is closer to 240. They admit, however, that the British production rate is rising. But, while the British may have solved some of their production problems since Munich, the professionals doubt that Royal Air Force expansion will catch up with German replacement capacity.
Another major subject of debate is over the merits of present military equipment. Although the French have publicly claimed that Germany lacks artillery, most professionals believe that the Nazis, who started from scratch in 1933, have an edge in modern guns, superior to hoary French models. The Germans use a new 105 mm. howitzer while the French rock along with antiquated Seventy-fives. Some professionals also contend that French rifles are out-of-date, "tall as the Eiffel Tower," hence difficult to conceal, whereas the Germans use a short carbine that snuggles neatly into shallow trenches and shell holes; that German anti-aircraft equipment is excellent, while the British, who need it more, are just beginning to approach bare minimum safety strength.
Brains. British Feminist Rebecca West once said: "Before a war military science seems a real science—like astronomy; but after a war it seems more like astrology." British Military Critic Liddell Hart replied: "Perhaps that conclusion is rather hard on astrology." The reason for Liddell Hart's cynicism is fundamentally something that neither free-lance nor professional military critics can measure.
When revolutionary France started to defend herself against foreign enemies at the beginning of the 19th Century her army consisted of an untrained rabble which, theoretically, should have been easy meat for the professional armies of surrounding nations. But the brains of Napoleon soon fused this rabble into a fine French army and, what is more, employed it to gain the greatest French victories since the 18th-Century days of Marshal Saxe.