War philosophers throughout history, such as Lao Tzu and Carl von Clausewitz, have emphasized the unpredictability and chaos of war. They understood that no matter how well-planned a military campaign might be, it is ultimately subject to the unpredictable nature of conflict. This is often summed up by the famous phrase "plans are worthless, but planning is everything." This means that while plans may be useful for organizing and preparing for war, they are bound & forced to improvise once they come into contact with the realities of combat. In other words, war is a dynamic and fluid situation that cannot be fully controlled or predicted, and it is only through continuous adaptation and improvisation that success can be achieved.
So instead of using ad hominem attacks to debunk Q, talk or write about why Q published the plan many times over?
