On 09/22/2016 05:52 PM, xorcist@sigaint.org wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 03:12:11AM -0000, xorcist@sigaint.org wrote:
They were bloody well fed anti tank and anti aircraft rpgs and the like by the USA - that's how they took down the USSR occupation.
Then took their AK47's and repelled NATO.
Your simplification may be useful to inspire, but more research by the wanna be AK47 wielder is most definitely required!
You really might want to look into this yourself.
Western military analysts tend to see the introduction of the Stinger missles as the "turning point" in the war.
Russian analysts see the decision much differently. Gorbachev had ordered the scale-down, and withdrawal a full year before the Afghans fired their first Stinger.
And of course, no one was feeding them artillery during the invasion by NATO.
But, in a way, you're right. It wasn't REALLY the rifle's that let them win. It was the mountains.
Yes, it was the desolate mountains. Plus the fact that decades of war had pounded everything so thoroughly.
Nevertheless, given the proper conditions and terrain it is not difficult to mitigate tanks and aircraft. It is not difficult to arrange a situation where an army needs to walk in, on foot.
And once you get them to that point, it's all about the rifles.
I don't know exactly what the terrain is like in some of the U.S. mountain areas, but I'm sure there are suitable areas. But it doesn't even matter.
If you have the bodies? Grab rifles, walk into New York and D.C., and squat them. Tanks and aircraft are useless. They aren't going to use artillery on Manhattan or D.C. Three thousand or so "tourists" show up over the course of 6-8 months in each city. There are abandoned subway tunnels in NY might get overlooked. You'd need access to some hardware to break in, but if you can manage something like this, that is trivial. There may be something similar in DC.
Right. US military have trained heavily for this scenario, however.
The problem isn't that artillery and aircraft are too difficult to avoid, and mitigate. Its that the people are too weak. Big difference.
Well, too weak or not, far too few of them want freedom badly enough.
And in any civil war scenario, its quite likely you'll gain anti-aircraft missles, artillery, etc, very early. It is always likely that you'll inspire at least a partial military coup.
Yep, go for those National Guard armories :)
And TAKE NOTICE all WANNA BE INSURRECTIONISTS - our TLA 'friends' will always try to infiltrate, demonstrate and thereafter express authority, and finally cause your insurrection to launch waay too early, well before you have any chance of succeeding.
That does seem to be a favorite tactic. But even if you take down the national government, it's police forces and National Guard units that would become feudal overlords. So armed insurrection seems pointless.
I don't know the whole story, but I read awhile back about some situation or another in the States where militias had a stand off with the Federal government, and the government stood down?
If this is true, its a serious indication that the United States government is greatly weakening. Considering its importance to the west, generally, its good news all around.
Wishful thinking.