Asymmetrical or attritional warfare
One of the reasons why they work is because it’s not about draining their resources as a whole, but targeting their resources when they engage in a battle. 100 people can beat 1000 people if the 1000 people are tired, low morale, or have less weapons etc. this is Whay asymmetrical warfare (just gonna call it AW).
The Russo-ukraine war is a good example of this. Although drones are extremely useful for other purposes, one of its key uses currently is targeting the supply.
This has been used throughout history and it’s partly why key battles were run. I think there was a battle between France and England one time in the 100 years war, and although outnumbered, England won a battle because they had better logistics. Their bows were in good condition, they were up on a hill and the enemy had to bring them through mud.
This is one of the key weaknesses of heavy armoured units, tanks etc, that it’s very resource intensive, and although it’s good for breaking through a line, the logistics are extremely difficult at times to maintain. The lightly armoured focus when building a mikitary works hecause it requires much less logistics to maintain, and when fighting defensive warfare, it can be extremely beneficial in hardy terrain.
Military tactics like elastic defense, or defense in depth seek to utilise this. Although it’s slightly different, it utilises something similar.
On the contrary, it is possible to have a static-defense strategy, where you seek to prevent them from pushing fully. This can be useable in certain terrain but it often requires heavy logistics, and if broken, it is often much easier for the enemy to continue fighting and gaining more land. It also has the added weakness of moving around it. The most famous example of this is the maginot line by France in world war 2. It seemed to stop Germany from going through and forced Germany to go around for a path that took less logistics.
Often in warfare, one of the most important things that decide the winner is logistics. This is also What makes a key advantage of smaller or lighter geared armies, the fact that it takes much less logistics to maintain
I was talking to my friend today about strategy and the convo ended early so I’m continuing it here. It’s an interest of mine