The Saga of Tanya the Evil - Vol. 28 Ch. 88 - Magnificent Victory I

[MangaDex]

 

[CrimsonWarden]

I support the commie city burning.

 

[LtSwampFox]

Ah, the most adorable war criminal

 

[Maplefield]

The empire is suffering from success 😂

 

[Bayaya]

Retreat 'forward'

 

[kenkagejack]

I looked up "ww1 German national anthem" and got Heil dir im Siegerkranz. The melody's the same as "God save the Queen" and "My country, tis of thee."

 

[windfang]

everyone facepalm so hard they end up on the floor in serious official meeting lmao,
the military official is capable if they know follow Tanya plan is the correct answer... but sadly gods are her opponent.

 

[AxeBurningfire]

god forbid women do anything smh my head my head

 

[avicena]

Ah, the most adorable war criminal

Hey, she's not war criminal (yet). Even for this operation, she always, at least technically, abide by chain of command and the rules of engagement. You can see how careful she's by asking the general staff for political consideration. I think given her goal of living nicely after the war, she's going to be really careful about crossing that line.

 

[JosebaZilarte]

I was smiling through the entire chapter. Seeing the high command struggling with so much success is... What was that word? Oh, yeah!...

Schadenfreude (/ˈʃɑːdənfrɔɪdə/ ; German: [ˈʃaːdn̩ˌfʁɔʏ̯də] ; lit. literal translation "harm-joy") is the experience of pleasure, joy, or self-satisfaction that comes from learning of or witnessing the troubles, failures, pain, suffering, or humiliation of another.

 

[commandodude]

A bunch of old farts didn't realize their toy super soldier could do what they thought was impossible.

lol, lmao even.

But still, there's a hint of how stoogy their thinking is complaining that Tanya, a little girl, might be the one leading them instead. In spite of all her achievements.

 

[SuperOniichan]

Hey, she's not war criminal (yet). Even for this operation, she always, at least technically, abide by chain of command and the rules of engagement. You can see how careful she's by asking the general staff for political consideration. I think given her goal of living nicely after the war, she's going to be really careful about crossing that line.

You are trying to justify a character in a situation where even the author himself ridicules the idea of heroic military violence. For example, she said back in the first arc that you must finally destroy the enemy to avoid revanchism.

 

[HunterCO]

A nothing like doing too good of a job lol

 

[mahtan]

"It will be the Empire against the world"
Or you could stop attacking the Empire for no reason!
That way no one else has to fear their city being attacked and no one else has to die for no reason.

 

[SuperOniichan]

"It will be the Empire against the world"
Or you could stop attacking the Empire for no reason!
That way no one else has to fear their city being attacked and no one else has to die for no reason.

Ishiyama approves of this post, lmao.

 

[mahtan]

Wouldn't after a big demonstration of force the best moment to push for peace?

 

[E421T]

You are trying to justify a character in a situation where even the author himself ridicules the idea of heroic military violence. For example, she said back in the first arc that you must finally destroy the enemy to avoid revanchism.

Well, I mean, it's true.
There are exactly two ways to successfully invade a country (whose citizens do not support said invasion):
1. Keep enemy military losses at an absolute minimum, assassinate leadership, make sure not a single civilian is harmed and give them some pretty big benefits so they see their life under a new flat as far better than before.
If it wasn't clear already this is almost impossible, and there are probably no to almost no recorded instances of this.
2. Is extreme violence.
---
That's kinda just how it is and that will likely never change.
It's more or less basic behavioral conditioning.
However, it has to be noted that neither of these methods will work 100%, and option 1 is probably better in the success rate due to not ruling by fear, but it's kinda impossible to actually pull off.
It is of course a whole other matter if, through careful use of propaganda and espionage, you can get the enemy population to support your cause and hate their own country, or make a common enemy that their government doesn't want to do anything against/is even allied with. If you can pull this off, and it's far more doable than #1, you'll probably even get volunteers for the army from the territory you took.
(Edit: For the example ahead, and I only really realized this after writing it, it's actually not really a "prime example" - they didn't even need much propaganda and planning to achieve this, the Soviets, British and US more or less did it for them.)
Prime example of this is the SS having about 950.000 people over the course of WW2, with around 500.000 of them not even being from Germany. Many were from the Baltic regions, joined for their shared hatred of the Soviets, and quite a few even from France, probably due to the British and Americans bombing their cities indiscriminately.

 

[SuperOniichan]

Well, I mean, it's true.
There are exactly two ways to successfully invade a country (whose citizens do not support said invasion):
1. Keep enemy military losses at an absolute minimum, assassinate leadership, make sure not a single civilian is harmed and give them some pretty big benefits so they see their life under a new flat as far better than before.
If it wasn't clear already this is almost impossible, and there are probably no to almost no recorded instances of this.
2. Is extreme violence.
---
That's kinda just how it is and that will likely never change.
It's more or less basic behavioral conditioning.
However, it has to be noted that neither of these methods will work 100%, and option 1 is probably better in the success rate due to not ruling by fear, but it's kinda impossible to actually pull off.
It is of course a whole other matter if, through careful use of propaganda and espionage, you can get the enemy population to support your cause and hate their own country, or make a common enemy that their government doesn't want to do anything against/is even allied with. If you can pull this off, and it's far more doable than #1, you'll probably even get volunteers for the army from the territory you took.
(Edit: For the example ahead, and I only really realized this after writing it, it's actually not really a "prime example" - they didn't even need much propaganda and planning to achieve this, the Soviets, British and US more or less did it for them.)
Prime example of this is the SS having about 950.000 people over the course of WW2, with around 500.000 of them not even being from Germany. Many were from the Baltic regions, joined for their shared hatred of the Soviets, and quite a few even from France, probably due to the British and Americans bombing their cities indiscriminately.

You didn't understand what the point of the argument was. Leaving aside attempts to admire the occupation potential of the SS (My mother and I are from regions that were partly occupied by the Wehrmacht's Romanian allies, so we can tell you a lot about how "humanely" they behaved here), the point was that Tanya's military strategy was canonically cynical and militaristic, while the man tried to somehow justify it from a humanistic side, although this was simply not required since the Zen himselfs portrays Tanya as a cynical commander.

It reminds me of the 00's, when a lot of people really didn't understand the idea of villainous protagonists and tried to seriously justify why Lelouch and Light didn't do anything wrong.

 

[E421T]

Leaving aside attempts to admire the occupation potential of the SS

First off, to clear that up, I wasnt trying to do that specifically. WW2 is just the conflict I know most about, and that's kind of a good example of the common enemy thing. I'm sure there are more and probably better examples throughout history.

You didn't understand what the point of the argument was.

As for that, well I'm really tired, so yeah, I probably didn't and I'll probably understand it tomorrow. But approaching it from a purely logical point of view (which would fit her), tanya was kinda right there.

 

[SuperOniichan]

First off, to clear that up, I want trying to do that specifically. WW2 is just the conflict I know most about, and that's kind of a good example of the common enemy thing. I'm sure there are more and probably better examples throughout history.

As for that, well I'm really tired, so yeah, I probably didn't and I'll probably understand it tomorrow.

I think that philosophy of Sun Tzu would very suited for you then. He always taught that any war should be swift and sure, because it places a heavy burden on ordinary people with all the moral and economic consequences. That is why his art of war is so sensitive to risk assessment (although, as expected, some of his methods are still too brutal by modern standards). The Chinese and Japanese hold him in high regard, so I wouldn't be surprised if Zen used some of his ideas in developing Tanya's military philosophy.