Quote about military leadership structure, I think from the Art of War?

[WickedWingsuits 0]

I don't normally post over here but I have been searching for a quote I heard and I just know someone will know what I am talking about!

I think it might be from the Art of War or similar. It is a quote about how 1 General leads 10 Colonels who leads 10 Majors who lead 10 Captains, etc etc, or something to that nature. It really describes how structure and delegation allows a single person to control an army.

Anyone know the exact quote I am talking about?

Thanks!

Simon

Summer Rental special, 5 weeks for the price of 4! That is $160 a month.

Try before You Buy with Wicked Wingsuits - WingsuitRental.com

[BIGUN 1,053]

While I cannot vest too much time in researching your request... SunTzu was more about strategy & tactics. My next thought was perhaps Clausewitz, but the more I think about it; that sounds more like Patton on span of control. Sorry, I can't find the exact quote you're looking for... but you might GoogleFu some of Patton's quotes.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[davjohns 1]

Not Sun Tzu or Clausewitz to my memory. I've studied Patton pretty well, and that doesn't sound like him either. Definitely not Musashi.

Sorry.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[sfzombie13 307]

i do seem to remember something about that in the art of war, not rank, but the numbers. i have 3 versions of the book on my phone and it seems to me that i remember something of that in the commentary which accompanied one of them, but not in the actual text from sun tzu.

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

[D22369 0]

closest I could find to what you describe is:

Resolved, that two Battalions of Marines be raised consisting of one Colonel, two Lieutenant Colonels, two Majors & Officers as usual in other regiments, that they consist of an equal number of privates with other battalions; that particular care be taken that no persons be appointed to office or inlisted into said Battalions, but such as are good seamen, or so acquainted with maritime affairs as to be able to serve to advantage by sea, when required. That they be inlisted and commissioned for and during the present war with Great Britain and the colonies, unless dismissed by Congress. That they be distinguished by the names of the first & second battalions of American Marines, and that they be considered a part of the number, which the continental Army before Boston is ordered to consist of.
—Resolution of the Continental Congress on 10 November 1775

Roy

They say I suffer from insanity.... But I actually enjoy it.

[Andy9o8 0]

So a strict reading of that would be that the first requirement to be a Marine is to be a good sailor, and then after that, you'd be considered part of the Army.
Let the bar fight begin.

[akarunway 1]

http://www.grunt.com/corps/scuttlebutt/marine-corps-stories/marine-corps-humor-usmc-vs-usn/

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[D22369 0]

ya gotta remember that was from the continental congress...

when the hell did congress ever get anything right?

took a few years for em to figure out Marines were the best and totally in their own class


Roy

They say I suffer from insanity.... But I actually enjoy it.

[D22369 0]

Quote

Go to Sea


Send the Marines


Drink Coffee

I love all the quotes from that link some of them were ones we actually used back in the mid 80's. this one made me laugh the most

Roy

They say I suffer from insanity.... But I actually enjoy it.

[Boomerdog 0]

I've read Sun-Tzu and don't recall seeing anything direct or derivative that alludes to the pyramid design you cite. Sun-Tzu does talk about the traits needed to be a General.

Clausewitz is focused on war from a political perspective. Again, I've not seen anything in reading Clausewitz that discusses the structure described but Clausewitz is a difficult read due to his writing that can be both straight forward mixed with nuance so it's possible to miss such a design in "On War."

What is exemplified here looks more like describing the principle of "Chain of Command."

While it may get the point across, it's not a good model. Something learned in the military many years ago is that a leader's effectiveness (so I was taught) is maximixed when they are directly leading no more than five individuals who in turn lead 3 - 5 etc etc.

Ten is a lot to directly manage and of course write fitness reports. It's been done, but not something recommended.

[muff528 3]

Maybe the "hierarchical collective command structure" which was/is/will have been observed by the Cytherians during an encounter with humans.

[Boomerdog 0]

To quote H.L. Mencken, "You could be right!"

[muff528 3]

Hey, I'm only getting a post in here so the thread shows up in "My Stuff/Posts". (I do that a lot, BTW )

[Boomerdog 0]

Rock on!!!!

[Dilligas 0]

The only thing that comes to mind for me is this:

For want of a nail the shoe was lost.
For want of a shoe the horse was lost.
For want of a horse the rider was lost.
For want of a rider the message was lost.
For want of a message the battle was lost.
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.

But I don't think that's what you're looking for...