Comments on: J.F.C. "Boney" Fuller - Wacko Genius of Armored Warfare

By: Jim

Jim — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 02:11:39 +0000

Was there a recurring thought, theme or philosophy that runs through JFC Fuller's contribution to histoiography?

By: Paul

Paul — Wed, 12 Jan 2011 15:45:00 +0000

It is now well known that Guderian, in the post war period, was pandering to Fuller about Fuller's influence on German warfare. A few German officers read Fuller's work, but the German way of war was aimed at a quickly destroying the enemy's forces. The introduction of tanks and aircraft merely allowed for the speed so essential to encircle and enemy, setting up his defeat.

By: Stephan Wilkinson

Stephan Wilkinson — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 21:22:50 +0000

"I think you’ll find he got his nick-name due to certain percieved [sic] similarities to Napoleon Bonaparte…"

Urban legend. He got his nickname as a boy, _long_ before there were any similarities to Bonaparte, either actual, military or perceived.

By: John Merkatatis

John Merkatatis — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 20:12:29 +0000

Another celebrated British General(Tillet?) contemporary of Fuller,once said:"there are two conservative powers under the sun: the Catholic Church and the British Army".In the case of Fuller's doctrine regarding the use of armour the above aphorism is very apt;
the British High Command turned a deaf ear;but someone else didn't
and he was destined to become one o the great captains of history
following unerringly Fuller's and B.H. Liddel-Heart's beliefs and causing the allies rivers of blood and three dark years of war; he was
general Heinz Guderian who developed the German armour units according to the principles laid down by Fuller.In the first two years of
war the German operations were a model of inception and execution
"we say it and we prove it"("Introduction to Military History" by the Swiss Army Department of History&Strategic Studies) .So Guderian changed the course of history by introducing a mode of fighting that everyone of the combatants had to adapt to, first to survive and then to
win the war.

By: Roger Ford

Roger Ford — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 12:27:28 +0000

I think you'll find he got his nick-name due to certain percieved similarities to Napoleon Bonaparte…

By: A.H Amin,Major (ret)Tank Corps

A.H Amin,Major (ret)Tank Corps — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 06:57:45 +0000

great military thinker and writer

http://low-intensity-conflict-review.blogspot.com/

By: WongHoongHooi

WongHoongHooi — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 07:21:17 +0000

I had commented in another thread that there seem (I may be wrong) to be few articles about how WWI SHOULD have been fought at the tactical/ operational level to achieve best results given the limitations.

This article as a sort of abridged autobiography is interesting but might have been more so as an opinion piece offering:

1. Specifics as to how Fuller's ideas could have been used to conduct an operational (corp/ sector) offensive in WWI given the actual troop types, training levels and resouces available.

2. Assessment of the chances of success of such an offensive (assuming limited objective of destroying enemy formations).

3. The strategic impact (if any) of a number of such operational successes.

By: Frank

Frank — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 19:47:22 +0000

He was a man of his times.
However, whilst JFC Fuller was talking about wars the BEF was winning. Fuller only became famous after the war. Why not concentrate on the men who actually fought and won?

By: MarcosKtulu

MarcosKtulu — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 23:37:54 +0000

How´s possible that Boney would have gained satisfaction at israeli victory, granted he was an antisemite? He'd rather had the egiptians winning, albeit with tactics not of his own.