Kneel down and beg for the argument about how weak the soldiers under the strong general are. Urgent need, ah ah ~ ~ Our view is that a strong general is a weak soldier. Thank you.

Everything has two sides. On the positive side, a "strong general" can make his "soldiers" braver. On the other hand, the reason why Jiang is called a "strong general" means that when Jiang is comprehensive and powerful, it often leads to sending Jiang to solve difficult problems. In this way, the soldiers under the "strong general" can only hide behind and "sit back and enjoy the success." These "soldiers" seem to be stained with the light of "strong generals", but they are pitiful! Please think about it. "Good face" is human nature. If you don't send a "strong general" when you encounter difficulties, you will have the idea that "this will have been surpassed by soldiers", which the "strong general" can't tolerate and always guard against. If "soldiers" insist on "getting ahead", they will inevitably be blocked by generals and suppressed by every means. In this way, there will be a situation that "one mountain can't accommodate two tigers", which will affect internal unity, and even lead to infighting and even disintegration of civil strife, making the situation out of control. Therefore, there is an old saying that "two tigers are not allowed in one mountain" and "Wu Dalang can't recruit waiters higher than him".

The story of Romance of the Three Kingdoms must be familiar to everyone, right? When faced with the critical moment of Cao Cao's millions of soldiers in the north, Liu Bei, the master of Shu, sent Zhuge Liang, a strategist, to the kingdom of Wu in Jiangdong to discuss and fight against Cao Cao together. In the battle for the command of the allied forces, there was a conflict between Zhou Yu and Zhuge Liang, the governor of Wu, because both of them had the strength and characteristics of "strong generals" and neither of them would condescend to accept the command of the other side, so there was a later allusion to "three Yu".

The existence of the "strong general" will also lead to another result, that is, those soldiers who stay under the "strong general" for a long time will be complacent and enjoy success because they are useless, so naturally they will "put their swords into the warehouse and spread their horses south", and slack will follow. After a long time, they will develop inertia. This is the most terrible thing. The laws of nature are irresistible. Sooner or later, the "strong generals" will get old and be powerless. When that day really comes, looking back, there are no talents available. This is the real tragedy! Let's talk about Shu in the romance of the Three Kingdoms. Because Zhuge Liang is really a genius, he won the appreciation and reuse of Liu Bei. Dou, the son of Liu Bei, had no chance to participate in the activities of governing the country and was excluded. All day, he had to eat, drink and be merry. As a result, shortly after Zhuge Liang's death, he personally gave away the country that his father had earned with blood and sweat! For example, in the last dynasty in China's feudal history, the Qing Dynasty, the founding king was good at fighting and often held hunting activities, but his children and grandchildren behind him stopped riding horses and shooting arrows. At that time, the children of the Eight Banners who were good at fighting gradually had only caged birds, and were finally humiliated and overthrown by the Revolution of 1911! How profound these historical lessons are! There are countless similar examples in ancient and modern China and abroad, so I don't need to go into them here.

Dear friends, through the above well-known examples, it is not difficult to draw such a truth: strong generals are weak soldiers. My debate is over, thank you!

(Written by David)