Changing the art of combat

A tiny force can beat a massive and powerful army if the terrain is right and they're willing to fight a long war of attrition. It happened in Vietnam and Afghanistan with the USA. And in Finland with the Soviets. Its hard to beat an enemy when you dont know who the enemy is and the terrain gives them cover.

Is It Normal?
Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[ Report Post ]
Comments ( 4 ) Sort: best | oldest
  • Defenders always have the advantage If theres a reason not to kill them all.

    America could of easily just glassed the place causing millions of casualties and more problems in the future.

    China we would be less inclined to use the kiddy gloves since they are another goverment.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    • They always say "America could never fight against its government and win because they have tanks" but tanks didn't help them too much in Afghanistan. All conventional tactics go out the window when you dont know who the enemy is. When America went to Afghanistan there was only an estimated taliban force of 70,000. And the USA lost that war. Imagine in the USA with a force of 330,000,000 all with guns and more money than the taliban. The military would have to bomb cities to the ground to contain them and that would inevitably destroy the US economy and that destroys the military itself. Same thing happened in Colombia with the Farc. A guerrila force in the right terrain is extremely hard to defeat. And eventually the government is forced to the negotiation table.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      • That's why gun "reform" is such a farce. I'll take the odd mass shooting over disarming myself. Fuck authoritarianism. I can love america and fight it at the same time.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
  • What you have written reminds me of the battle tactic in this story:

    To be fair, I'm not sure this army knew its opponents either.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
Add A Comment