|
September 25, 2020 Offense/Defense September 11, 2020 Address It! Say It! September 1, 2020 Child Predators August 27, 2020 Faithfulness August 18, 2020 Before getting married? August 11, 2020 Deceptive Meme August 8, 2020 Principles of Love August 6, 2020 Confused Words August 1, 2020 More Randomness |
 |
SITE UNDER RECONSTRUCTION September 1, 2020 Bio page updated August 18, 2020 Addition to Author Page August 11, 2020 Sidebar colors changed August 6, 2020 Election info added to Calendar July 28, 2020 Calendar revised |
|||
    |
|||||
    |
|||||
September 25, 2020
|
I'm going to talk about the two things that tend to get people arguing with me, one in the political realm, and the other mainly in sports but crossing over into politics. First, though, I want to talk about what is called the "Maginot Line". This was a series of French fortifications along the German border, built in the 1930s. It extended from La Ferté, along the southern part of the border with Belgium, to the Rhine. I've never found out where along the Rhine, which forms part of the German border between Karlsruhe and Basel, Switzerland, but it was probably Karlsruhe. This would leave the Germans to either cross the Rhine, making them vulnerable, or invade from Belgium and possibly get trapped along the coast or against the Ardennes Forest, which every Allied country considered unpassable. Germany chose the latter, but took the unprepared territory by surprise through the Ardennes. I first heard about the Maginot Line in a computer war game in which that was an option. Having never heard of it, I ended up learning about more than the Line, I learned exactly what offense and defense are. One other thing I learned years before I heard of the Line is that everything is defined by its opposite. (Try to think of something that has no opposite. I've never been able to do it.) So, I looked at what the Maginot line could and could not do. First, the obvious factor was that they were virtually indestructible from the ground. This is a key defensive factor. Another factor was another defensive factor, that they were impenetrable. Anything stored inside was perfectly safe, whether troops, vehicles, or supplies. But the third isn't frequently thought about, and has been exploited against fortifications throughout the millenia: The fortifications were immobile. Any force housed inside had to mobilize and exit the fort to counterattack. This, historically, has been the fatal flaw in fortifications. American History is full of such failures, from Fort Pontiac to The Alamo to Vicksburg. That last sentence is what revealed the meanings of offense and defense to me. These factors are all designed to prevent assault of the immediate area. This is defense. But if an action is designed to prevent further intrusion, that is offense. As long as everything was inside the fortress, everything inside was safe. The same did not apply to anything outside. This is widely accepted as the key reason why the Maginot line failed, allowing enemy forces to pass with little hindrance. (The other is that France underestimated how well the German army could navigate the Ardennes.) So, this became my conclusion: Defense does nothing to prevent the opponent from wearing down those defenses and breaking through. Offense stops the opponent from further incursion by eliminating that incursion and, possibly, preventing any further attempt at incursion. With that in mind, let's take the argument to a different subject: J.J. Watt of the Houston Texans. He's known as one of the most prolific pass blockers and sack leaders in the game today, and has achieved superstar status as a defender. But given the definition I give above, how much is actually defense? Answer: Not much. The purpose of the defensive squad is to prevent the opposing offense from scoring, which falls under the definition of defense. But in order to sack the quarterback, Watt must attack the opposing defender, which is offensive. Never thought of that, did you? Now, let's take this to the political issue: guns. Let's say you're a gun owner who is facing down someone you saw commit a crime. You are pointing your gun at them, but don't fire. You threaten them. This is defensive, whether or not they have a gun. But if the perpetrator also has a gun, there's a variety of situations that can happen and you may be forced to pull the trigger. this is offense because it is intended to prevent the other person from attacking any further. But here's the scenario I use in the "open carry" argument. Let's say you have that gun next to you, ready to pull . Three people walk in. They look harmless . . . until they pull out their well-hidden guns. Think you're the "good guy with a gun"? Well, you are, but you'll be no hero. They saw that gun at your side, and before you can pull it from where you're got it, the barrel of another gun will already be pointed at your head. Bang. It's over. The "good guy with a gun" is usually the first one dead. Why? Becuase the perpetrator got the offensive move in before you could even get your offense ready. This post is more about offense and defense, not gun control or the Second Amendment. But it's something that needs to be considered in the gun debates. As for offense and defense, people laughed when I told them the Colts would win Superbowl XLI over the Bears. I took the offensive powerhouse Colts over the defensive monster Bears by a score of 30-19. Football fans everywhere scoffed, sighting defense. But when I was off by only three points . . . crickets. That 29-17 win silenced them all. I have said something for years that I end up in an argument over: you are only as good as your offense. To prove this, look at the example of someone trained in shooting guns, but shaking and reluctant, versus someone with no aim who won't hesitate to fire. Who is more likely to win that battle? Answer: The one who pulls the trigger. And in football, look at what the two lines do. The defensive line is attacking, tryng to get to the quarterback and, at the very least, create a mistake. This takes attacking to they can reach the man. The offensive line, however, is almost exclusively blocking--a defensive stance. So, yes, the defensive line actually uses offensive moves, while the offensive line is on defense. And a final note: Despite fans everywhere taking the Bears, the Colts were favored by 7. Weird, huh? Until next time . . . |
You are visitor number
since July 8, 2020