Guerilla Warfare

[Aragoni]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contras

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viet_Cong

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yugoslav_Partisans

List goes on but I cba to link more.

Thx. However I still want a source that shows that a guerilla army cannot succeed without foreign support.

I suggest you read both Che Guevara's and Mao Zedong's book about Guerilla Warfare. They won't make you an expert but you certainly learn alot about logistics, tactics and shit. :)

I'm sure China being in a crippled state after WWII and the japanese occupation didn't help :)

No but Nationalist China recieved loads of help from the U.S.
Also, the Nationalist army was still bigger and more advanced then the Communistic.

Same goes for Cuba, Batista was a fucking moron and Cuba was shit.

Batista still had a bigger and more advanced army the Castro.

Ya Che Guevara did real well. Most overrated *** ever.

Overrated, yes. However, he (and Castro) really was a genius in Cuba when it came to tactics.

How goes the source btw?

[EAZYmfE]

I said outside support. Not necessarily foreign support. You still need equipment and food.

As for China and Cuba, both were absolutely terrible.

[Aragoni]

I said outside support. Not necessarily foreign support. You still need equipment and food.

As for China and Cuba, both were absolutely terrible.

Specify what you mean with "outside" then. You mean the Peoples support? I've already said that the Guerilla army needs that (at least 15%, according to Mao).
The food you can get from the people through donations and the equipment you get from the opponents (Once again, Cuba and China).

Terrible in what?

[EAZYmfE]

Specify what you mean with "outside" then. You mean the Peoples support? I've already said that the Guerilla army needs that (at least 15%, according to Mao).
The food you can get from the people through donations and the equipment you get from the opponents (Once again, Cuba and China).

Terrible in what?

Support from individuals outside the actual Guerilla.

Also, lol @ donations. I'm sure they were complete voluntary in all cases.

By terrible I mean unstable.

EDIT: Anyway, in most cases (fighting relatively stable governments or decent armies) they will lose or not accomplish anything, see Columbia, N.I etc.

[Tiarilir]

And the game is on!
*finds that old flame-suit*

[HorrorHotel]

What the hell is this?

[EAZYmfE]

What the hell is this?

Continuation of "I just tried Budweiser".

Swede talking about warfare. It's ironic.

[Aragoni]

Support from individuals outside the actual Guerilla.

You mean the people? Then yes.

Also, lol @ donations. I'm sure they were complete voluntary in all cases.

Most of the times, yes. Why would a force, that is dependent on the people on both manpower and logistics (not weapons), go around and pillage? That's suicide.

By terrible I mean unstable.

Unstable in what..? As I've said before both the Nationalist China army and the Cuban army was more experienced, well-armed and so on then the rebels. The rebels was usually farmers with no combat experience (except after a few fights then.. hehe) and they were usually hungry (read a little and you'll understand why. The 2 books I talked about are good at telling about this).

[Aragoni]

Continuation of "I just tried Budweiser".

Swede talking about warfare. It's ironic.

I'm a Swede and I obviously know more about warfare then you do. I hope you're ashamed of yourself.
How goes the source btw?

[EAZYmfE]

I'm a Swede and I obviously know more about warfare then you do. I hope you're ashamed of yourself.
How goes the source btw?

source for what?

[EAZYmfE]

You mean the people? Then yes.



Most of the times, yes. Why would a force, that is dependent on the people on both manpower and logistics (not weapons), go around and pillage? That's suicide.



Unstable in what..? As I've said before both the Nationalist China army and the Cuban army was more experienced, well-armed and so on then the rebels. The rebels was usually farmers with no combat experience (except after a few fights then.. hehe) and they were usually hungry (read a little and you'll understand why. The 2 books I talked about are good at telling about this).

Then how come the rebels won? Asshole.

[Bawlin]

A 2 person thread? This is new.

[Aragoni]

source for what?

Oh nvm.

Then how come the rebels won? Asshole.

Rebels won in those two examples? Because they had the support of the people. The whole idea about guerilla warfare is ordinary people taking up arms against a government even though they are lacking in everything and with the support of the people they shall overcome and win!
Nice Ad Hominem there.
"It is also used when an opponent is unable to find fault with an argument, yet for various reasons, the opponent disagrees with it."
-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

[Aragoni]

A 2 person thread? This is new.

Indeed it is. I'd like to invite everyone else that is reading this thread to join the debate. It's funny as hell :)

[EAZYmfE]

Oh nvm.



Rebels won in those two examples? Because they had the support of the people. The whole idea about guerilla warfare is ordinary people taking up arms against a government even though they are lacking in everything and with the support of the people they shall overcome and win!
Nice Ad Hominem there.
"It is also used when an opponent is unable to find fault with an argument, yet for various reasons, the opponent disagrees with it."
-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

I know what an ad hominem is. My point was simply that without weapons you cannot fight a war, and Swedes don't have any weapons. You will thus not be able to launch a succesful guerilla campaign because noone will be willing to help you, because you assholes stayed out of every war and let your fellow europeans die for 200 years.

That's my main point. I really don't care if in some freak case, versus a shit army in a country that is in one case so corrupt that the Mafia had more control over it than the actual government had, and in the other is recovering from an extremely bloody occupation, some guerilla manages to win. It usually doesn't happen.

[Aragoni]

I know what an ad hominem is. My point was simply that without weapons you cannot fight a war, and Swedes don't have any weapons. You will thus not be able to launch a succesful guerilla campaign because noone will be willing to help you, because you assholes stayed out of every war and let your fellow europeans die for 200 years.

First of all. With "Swedes" do you mean the Swedish Army or the Swedish people?
If you mean the army then I'm abit 50/50. Our army is smaller then it used to be and it's more focused on the terrorism (which the government considers to be the big threat). However the troops that we do have are trained and equiped. Probably not able to fend of the U.S. but still.
The people? We have guns, not the amount of Americans and Canadians but enough for a guerilla warfare. Hunter-rifles, pistols, sub-machine guns (from people that have been members in the army) and much more. Not bazookas or anything though but that could maybe be fixed. Tactics tactics...
Don't forget that we export loads of weapons also to foreign countries. We have a big weapons industry.

That's my main point. I really don't care if in some freak case, versus a shit army in a country that is in one case so corrupt that the Mafia had more control over it than the actual government had, and in the other is recovering from an extremely bloody occupation, some guerilla manages to win. It usually doesn't happen.

Lol? You're ignoring the facts that (as I've said 2 times before) that the armies was still bigger, better trained and better equiped then the guerillas.
Mafia = Doesn't matter since they didn't control the army.
Recovering = They got loads of support from the U.S. + see above.

[MattMystrieo]

This acutally be very intresting.

[Aragoni]

This acutally be very intresting.

Yupp.. It's a shame EAZYmfE disappeared. :(

[EAZYmfE]

First of all. With "Swedes" do you mean the Swedish Army or the Swedish people?
If you mean the army then I'm abit 50/50. Our army is smaller then it used to be and it's more focused on the terrorism (which the government considers to be the big threat). However the troops that we do have are trained and equiped. Probably not able to fend of the U.S. but still.
The people? We have guns, not the amount of Americans and Canadians but enough for a guerilla warfare. Hunter-rifles, pistols, sub-machine guns (from people that have been members in the army) and much more. Not bazookas or anything though but that could maybe be fixed. Tactics tactics...
Don't forget that we export loads of weapons also to foreign countries. We have a big weapons industry.



Lol? You're ignoring the facts that (as I've said 2 times before) that the armies was still bigger, better trained and better equiped then the guerillas.
Mafia = Doesn't matter since they didn't control the army.
Recovering = They got loads of support from the U.S. + see above.

Your weapon industry is an industry, if your country is being occupied don't expect it to pump out weapons to the resistance.

As for Cuba and China, yes, the armies were bigger but they were in a fucking disarray and lacked competent leadership. I'm not saying a guerilla force is completely useless, and you shouldn't underestimate it. But its hardly an i-win button, especially in recent days when supply lines are alot easier to defend and logistics in general are easier to manage.

A guerilla is useful as a means of resistance, it can be used to weaken an enemy force prior to an attack or to gain political support (Tet-offensive, Iraq, N.I) but to say that it can never be defeated is a flat out lie. You defeat it by defeating the ideology that lies behind it and snap the willpower out of the people to keep on fighting. You may say that "we will never lose hope" or that you "will fight to the end", and that may be true in your case. But to think that everyone is as brave as you is nationalistic nonsense. The brave will die first and the cowards will accept their new overlords. As for actually defeating a guerilla its alot easier for a totalitarian state, they can use more force to put pressure on the guerilla and the local population that may be supporting it. The US is thankfully the land of liberty and justice, so we cannot allow ourselves to sink to the level of barbarians (altough it may be more effective) so it is of course harder for us to fight any guerilla force effectively (As was the case in Vietnam), but we'd still kick your ass because Swedes are too pussy to put up any decent resistance.

Can a guerilla alone achieve military victory over an army? Yes, if the conditions are right. Is it common? No.

Can a Swedish guerilla alone achieve military victory over the US army?
Hell no.

tl;dr me > you.

[Tiarilir]

I thought you were muslim, EAZYmfE

[Aragoni]

Your weapon industry is an industry, if your country is being occupied don't expect it to pump out weapons to the resistance.

Wars isn't started without a reason and within a minute. If a war was about to happen it would probably take a few months and thus the industry would've sent those weapons to the army.

As for Cuba and China, yes, the armies were bigger but they were in a fucking disarray and lacked competent leadership.

Disarray? The Cuban wasn't in disarray (unless I've missed something when I wrote an essay about the revolution for school). The Chinese was to some degree in disarray. However, you shouldn't give this too much credit since they also lost the propaganda war that was happening (and thus giving the troops bad morale and more support to the Communists).
Lacked competent leadership? hm.. not really. The thing with these two cases was that the guerilla army had spies within their enemies lines while their enemies knew very little of the positions and shit of the guerillas.
Plus the Guerilla armies usually fought in favourable terrain.
Also the Nationalist generals were experienced from the war against the Japanese.

I'm not saying a guerilla force is completely useless, and you shouldn't underestimate it. But its hardly an i-win button, especially in recent days when supply lines are alot easier to defend and logistics in general are easier to manage.

It isn't an I-win button unless the people wants and supports them. I saw you mentioned the FARC-gerilla back on the first page and let me just ask you a question; Do you know how many of the civilians (% wise) that supports this? Without the support of the people guerilla warfare doesn't work, at all.

A guerilla is useful as a means of resistance, it can be used to weaken an enemy force prior to an attack or to gain political support (Tet-offensive, Iraq, N.I) but to say that it can never be defeated is a flat out lie.You defeat it by defeating the ideology that lies behind it and snap the willpower out of the people to keep on fighting.

Never said that you cannot defeat a guerilla army. I've ALWAYS stated that as long as you have the support of the people the guerilla army will continue to fight and unless the invading army manages to change the peoples wish to fight on, as you just said. Sooner or later the Guerilla army will win if the people supports it, that's for sure.

You may say that "we will never lose hope" or that you "will fight to the end", and that may be true in your case. But to think that everyone is as brave as you is nationalistic nonsense. The brave will die first and the cowards will accept their new overlords.

You don't have to be brave to support a guerilla army with food, water and so on. You make it sound like everyone would be in the guerilla army, fighting head-on against the Americans which I've never stated.

As for actually defeating a guerilla its alot easier for a totalitarian state, they can use more force to put pressure on the guerilla and the local population that may be supporting it.

Because it has worked so well before, right? :rolleyes:

The US is thankfully the land of liberty and justice, so we cannot allow ourselves to sink to the level of barbarians (altough it may be more effective)

I read that, googled "Guantanamo base", chuckled and then moved on. Not to forget the reports of the U.S. army using napalm (http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030810-napalm-iraq01.htm).
You gives are so civilized when it comes to war! Give France back the Statue Of Liberty please.

so it is of course harder for us to fight any guerilla force effectively (As was the case in Vietnam), but we'd still kick your ass because Swedes are too pussy to put up any decent resistance.

And what do you know about that? Generalisations much? :)

Can a guerilla alone achieve military victory over an army? Yes, if the conditions are right. Is it common? No.

Can a Swedish guerilla alone achieve military victory over the US army?
Hell no.

Contradictions much?

tl;dr me > you.

Indeed. tl;dr me > you.

Edit: I'll answer tomorrow when I wake up. It's 04:09 :)

[EAZYmfE]

Wars isn't started without a reason and within a minute. If a war was about to happen it would probably take a few months and thus the industry would've sent those weapons to the army.

Which is promptly defeated in 3 days. Cuz you suck.



Disarray? The Cuban wasn't in disarray (unless I've missed something when I wrote an essay about the revolution for school). The Chinese was to some degree in disarray. However, you shouldn't give this too much credit since they also lost the propaganda war that was happening (and thus giving the troops bad morale and more support to the Communists).
Lacked competent leadership? hm.. not really. The thing with these two cases was that the guerilla army had spies within their enemies lines while their enemies knew very little of the positions and shit of the guerillas.
Plus the Guerilla armies usually fought in favourable terrain.
Also the Nationalist generals were experienced from the war against the Japanese.

Cuba was in disarray 100% of the time under Batista because he was quite incompetent.

As for nationalist generals, yeah they had alot of experience getting their asses kicked by they didn't do much winning vs. the japs.

And yeah, guerillas usually do fight in favourable terrain cuz thats their entire fucking tactic.



It isn't an I-win button unless the people wants and supports them. I saw you mentioned the FARC-gerilla back on the first page and let me just ask you a question; Do you know how many of the civilians (% wise) that supports this? Without the support of the people guerilla warfare doesn't work, at all.

I don't think the people of Colombia have a choice, I think they support the faction that currently has a gun pointed at them. And no, FARC are terrible.



Never said that you cannot defeat a guerilla army. I've ALWAYS stated that as long as you have the support of the people the guerilla army will continue to fight and unless the invading army manages to change the peoples wish to fight on, as you just said. Sooner or later the Guerilla army will win if the people supports it, that's for sure.


You said with the support of the people the guerilla could never be defeated. Thats bullshit. BTW you can change people's will through mass executions and torture.


You don't have to be brave to support a guerilla army with food, water and so on. You make it sound like everyone would be in the guerilla army, fighting head-on against the Americans which I've never stated.

You do if the government will kill you and your entire family if they find out you're supporting them.



Because it has worked so well before, right? :rolleyes:


Well yeah. Not for the US, but uh we're not a totalitarian state. Sorry :(


I read that, googled "Guantanamo base", chuckled and then moved on. Not to forget the reports of the U.S. army using napalm (http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030810-napalm-iraq01.htm).
You gives are so civilized when it comes to war! Give France back the Statue Of Liberty please.

lol, napalm is just fire and Guantanamo is hardly very brutal. Get over yourself, hippie.



And what do you know about that? Generalisations much? :)


If your Swedish ass knows how to fight a guerilla war I know anything I wanna know.


Contradictions much?


No, just a misunderstanding. Maybe I was not clear enough.


Indeed. tl;dr you > me.


indeed

Edit: I'll answer tomorrow when I wake up. It's 04:09 :)

pussy

[Mippoose]

This is such an E-Peen thread.

/endthread

[Mippoose]

And yeah, guerillas usually do fight in favourable terrain cuz thats their entire fucking tactic.

Fucking epic.

ROCKED

FUCKIN ROCKED ARAGONI

[Foodfreak18]

Gotta hand it to Castro, took over a country and outlasted 9 Presidents who wanted him gone in some form or another (going to be 10 in a few months).

[Aragoni]

Which is promptly defeated in 3 days. Cuz you suck.

You're such an abuser of Ad hominem. Obviously you have no arguments. :p

Cuba was in disarray 100% of the time under Batista because he was quite incompetent.

When it came to the army, no, it was not under disarray. In the end it was of course under disarray but wtf, a few men in the mountains managed to defeat the army, of course that strikes against the morale of the soldiers.

As for nationalist generals, yeah they had alot of experience getting their asses kicked by they didn't do much winning vs. the japs.

The Soviets got their asses handed to them by the German troops in the beginning, does that make the generals sucky-sucky? No.
Plus, as I've said before there are loads of factors which made the revolutionary side win, not just one.


And yeah, guerillas usually do fight in favourable terrain cuz thats their entire fucking tactic.

I can clearly see you don't know jackshit about Guerilla Warfare.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerilla_Warfare#Tactics_of_guerrilla_wa rfare
Please read a little or don't say shit because you're making such a fool of yourself.


I don't think the people of Colombia have a choice, I think they support the faction that currently has a gun pointed at them. And no, FARC are terrible.

That's not what I asked. What I asked was how many % of the people that supported FARC.
After reading http://usacac.army.mil/CAC/milreview/English/MarApr04/MarApr04/valenzuela.pdf (page 4 - 5) I wouldn't say that FARC is a guerilla army. It's more, as it says, a terrorist and drug-trafficking organization.

You said with the support of the people the guerilla could never be defeated. Thats bullshit. BTW you can change people's will through mass executions and torture.

How would that be possible? Please explain. The people is the source of constant supplies and manpower.
Yes, that could change the people's will but have I said anything different?

You do if the government will kill you and your entire family if they find out you're supporting them.

So you're saying that the US army would kill an entire family for supporting the Guerilla? Ok.... :rolleyes:


Well yeah. Not for the US, but uh we're not a totalitarian state. Sorry :(

An example where the totalitarian state has crushed a guerilla please.

lol, napalm is just fire and Guantanamo is hardly very brutal. Get over yourself, hippie.

Napalm is banned under international law (which tries to keep wars on a civil level, not "down the barbarian level").
Guantanamo is brutal. The fact that you're supporting your own government using torture, convicting people for a crime without an ordinary jury and brushing off the whole thing as nothing is amazing. You're a neo-con, aren't you?

If your Swedish ass knows how to fight a guerilla war I know anything I wanna know.

Did Mao Zedong know how to fight a Guerilla war in the beginning? No. A competent leader and the Guerilla army is good to go.

No, just a misunderstanding. Maybe I was not clear enough.

Let's see here... You're saying that a guerilla army can defeat an ordinary army if certain goals are met, and then you say that a Swedish guerilla couldn't defeat the U.S. army.
*facepalm*

pussy

Fuck yes. Those that sleeps = Pussy. If you would've stayed in the debate instead of running away with your tail between your legs for 2 hours I would've continued to bash your stupid arguments. :)

[Aragoni]

Gotta hand it to Castro, took over a country and outlasted 9 Presidents who wanted him gone in some form or another (going to be 10 in a few months).

I believe there has been over 60 assassination attempts on him. His persistence is amazing.

[The Cougar]

Stop linking to a Wiki article in every fucking post you make.

[Aragoni]

Stop linking to a Wiki article in every fucking post you make.

Talking to me? In one outa ten (11 with this one) posts that I've written have I linked to Wikipedia. :rolleyes:

[The Cougar]

Lies!

[Wufiavelli]

Yugoslav paritisans received no outside support, Stalin said he would send shit but never really did. Also Abdul Haq ran the largest guerrilla group against the soviets during the russian invasion. he did not receive much support because pakistan who distributed the weapons did not find him a good proxy like the islamist.

As for cuba it was in disarray, there were uprising across the entire country. Che thought the method used in Cuba with a small force and mass uprising would work other places. because of that Che is not dead. Che is a lot of hype

[Aragoni]

Yugoslav paritisans received no outside support, Stalin said he would send shit but never really did. Also Abdul Haq ran the largest guerrilla group against the soviets during the russian invasion. he did not receive much support because pakistan who distributed the weapons did not find him a good proxy like the islamist.

With EASY's definition of "outside support" I'm having a hard time believing that those partisans didn't recieve it. How would a guerilla army survive without food and shit? Of course, they could pillage but that's suicide in the long run.

As for cuba it was in disarray, there were uprising across the entire country.

There were (very) small guerilla armies out on the countryside. Nothing big really which could create such a chaos that EASY is speaking off.

Che thought the method used in Cuba with a small force and mass uprising would work other places. because of that Che is not dead. Che is a lot of hype

Che is alot of hype yes. I mean, wtf is it with all the t-shirts?
However he deserves the respect of everyone (Communists & non-Communists) because he did everything he could for the ideas he believed in. It's not that often you see this in our world today.

[Wufiavelli]

Don't really need to pillage, all you really need is a barbaric form of taxation. OOOOh how it sucks to be a small village caught in the middle of an insurgency and counter insurgency campaign.

There is nothing pretty or romantic about guerrilla war, it engulfs the whole society into chaos and killings.

As for che, i guess so but you could say the same for the American Advisor (forget his name) who helped kill him. Besides help stop something he saw as evil he did lot of charity work and risked his own life during earth quakes and other tragedies throughout south america.

[Aragoni]

Don't really need to pillage, all you really need is a barbaric form of taxation. OOOOh how it sucks to be a small village caught in the middle of an insurgency and counter insurgency campaign.

Define 'barbaric form of taxation'. If it's "Give me your money, food and water or I'll shoot you" I'd count it as pillaging.

There is nothing pretty or romantic about guerrilla war, it engulfs the whole society into chaos and killings.

Never said that it is any of those 2. War overall is cruel and ugly and should be avoided unless you got one hell of a reason.

[Fro]

Guerilla warfare doesn't need outside help but it helps alot if they get it.

[Wufiavelli]

Then you can call it pillaging and it goes on throughout all guerrilla wars. Vietcong normally first introduction to a village was to walk in and kill off someone important. Yugoslav partisans saw slaughtering of villages depending on which side they chose. Russian revolution is filled with Green Villages all over the place that got slaughtered for their choice.

Some armies are less barbaric then others but fear is definitely a major factor in coverting villages too your side.

[Aragoni]

Guerilla warfare doesn't need outside help but it helps alot if they get it.

I'm having a hard time to think of a Guerilla band that successfully manages to conquer the whole country without any support of the people.
But that's just me. Example and I believe you.

[Aragoni]

Then you can call it pillaging and it goes on throughout all guerrilla wars. Vietcong normally first introduction to a village was to walk in and kill off someone important. Yugoslav partisans saw slaughtering of villages depending on which side they chose. Russian revolution is filled with Green Villages all over the place that got slaughtered for their choice.

Some armies are less barbaric then others but fear is definitely a major factor in coverting villages too your side.

Great examples and I guess that's true. :)

[Fro]

I'm having a hard time to think of a Guerilla band that successfully manages to conquer the whole country without any support of the people.
But that's just me. Example and I believe you.

Well i assumed when you said outside help you meant money, training or equipmeant from an outside source. Still its possible.

[Aragoni]

Well i assumed when you said outside help you meant money, training or equipmeant from an outside source. Still its possible.

Neither of those is necessary. The main supplier of equipment in the guerilla wars (from what I've read) is usually, ironically enough, their enemies. :)
Training is usually limited, at least in the early stages. Teaching the people to fire a hunting rifle is usually the only thing unless the person is going to do some sabotage or anything like that.

Edit: Keep in mind that I've mostly studied Cuba, China and the (really) basic shit of Viet Cong. Plus reading "On Guerilla Warfare", written by Mao Zedong and "Guerilla Warfare" by Che Guevara. If you find any faults then by all means, correct me. :)

[Tiarilir]

This thread is for nerds who think fiction will ever exist in real life.

[Fro]

This thread is for nerds who think fiction will ever exist in real life.

Thats stupid, if fiction existed in real life it wouldn't be fiction so obviously it can never happen. Also man tits.

Neither of those is necessary. The main supplier of equipment in the guerilla wars (from what I've read) is usually, ironically enough, their enemies. :)
Training is usually limited, at least in the early stages. Teaching the people to fire a hunting rifle is usually the only thing unless the person is going to do some sabotage or anything like that.

Thats what i said but it still helps alot.

[Aragoni]

This thread is for nerds who think fiction will ever exist in real life.

Please elaborate.

Thats what i said but it still helps alot.

Really? *Scratches head*. Then I apologise.

[escarondito]

Support from individuals outside the actual Guerilla.

Also, lol @ donations. I'm sure they were complete voluntary in all cases.

By terrible I mean unstable.

EDIT: Anyway, in most cases (fighting relatively stable governments or decent armies) they will lose or not accomplish anything, see Columbia, N.I etc.

the northern ireland actually accomplished their tasks and got the people behind him.


and no one is noting that many guerilla armies or groups are sponsored by the state...thats correct america and many other countries support terrorism if it;s against our enemies

[Tiarilir]

Thats stupid, if fiction existed in real life it wouldn't be fiction so obviously it can never happen. Also man tits.


Exactly, that's why my statement is true.
You love my man tits.

[Wufiavelli]

Dislodging a goverment especially with outside support is also hard. Vietnam was won because the North Vietnamiese regular army rolled in. The Soviet puppet goverment in Afghanistan Also surived till its funding got cut off when the Soviet Union Disolved, and what contributed greatly too the Cuban win was an Arms Embargo put against Batista by the US.

[Wufiavelli]

the northern ireland actually accomplished their tasks and got the people behind him.


and no one is noting that many guerilla armies or groups are sponsored by the state...thats correct america and many other countries support terrorism if it;s against our enemies

Northern Ireland was also mostly a bunch of Gangster and thugs, the British actually turned alot of die Hard nationalist once they became disillusioned from the lack of support they were getting from the higher ups.

[Fro]

You love my man tits.

Yeh but don't tell anyone.

[Aragoni]

and no one is noting that many guerilla armies or groups are sponsored by the state...thats correct america and many other countries support terrorism if it;s against our enemies

True. However, me and EASY mostly spoke about the Cuban and the Chinese guerilla armies. Neither of those got any foreign aid (except maybe the Communistic Chinese that got some shit from the Soviets, but this was limited and the Nationalists recieved loads of more from Mr. USA)

[Lethn]

Some people are just born idiots, I think the one genuinely successful form of Guerrilla Warfare I can think of right now was Vietnam, sure they had help from the chinese but compared to all the others they had one thing on their side and that was the support of the local populace. If you have the support of civilians then you can get supplies from them freely because they'll be the ones producing it and they can help out with transporting them as well just as they did in Vietnam, of course this would have to be all hidden, the Vietnam Guerrilla army got their equipment from the Chinese and the civilians transported them along the jungle paths, but there is no reason why Guerrilla warfare wouldn't also work if they had stashed supplies in different places for a long time and had plenty of cover to move around in.

Guerrilla Warfare is pretty much similar to siege warfare except your not in a deeply entrenched stronghold, your pretty much supposed to be outlasting the enemy or vice versa, to put it simply it's like your laying siege to an entire country rather than just a small area.

Go and look up the Cold War, seriously, America supported South Korea in that civil war and they were a dictatorship, I believe they also supported a king in Greece, I'd personally take your patriotism and shove it up your ass if I were you, this is also a reason why I don't trust Governments and Politicians when they decide that they're god's chosen one and come in the name of peace, the great thing is peace treaties and agreements are fixed so that they don't include supporting other countries with supplies or weaponry, dare I mention Israel and Pakistan?

[Wufiavelli]

OOOh another army that actually recieved little support from the outsideand was very successfull

Eritria against ethiopia. They actually defeated the best supplied army in Africa the time. They also held 10k or so Ethopian POWs who were ceritfied by the red cross as treated well. Famine deaths in their territories were only 10k while the Ethopians were in the hundreds of thousands because of pro active measures they took to get people to refuge camps. They really were in all sences a peoples army. Sadly however they even now have become a rather despotic regime.

[Wufiavelli]

Some people are just born idiots, I think the one genuinely successful form of Guerrilla Warfare I can think of right now was Vietnam, sure they had help from the chinese but compared to all the others they had one thing on their side and that was the support of the local populace. If you have the support of civilians then you can get supplies from them freely because they'll be the ones producing it and they can help out with transporting them as well just as they did in Vietnam, of course this would have to be all hidden, the Vietnam Guerrilla army got their equipment from the Chinese and the civilians transported them along the jungle paths, but there is no reason why Guerrilla warfare wouldn't also work if they had stashed supplies in different places for a long time and had plenty of cover to move around in.

Guerrilla Warfare is pretty much similar to siege warfare except your not in a deeply entrenched stronghold, your pretty much supposed to be outlasting the enemy or vice versa, to put it simply it's like your laying siege to an entire country rather than just a small area.

Go and look up the Cold War, seriously, America supported South Korea in that civil war and they were a dictatorship, I believe they also supported a king in Greece, I'd personally take your patriotism and shove it up your ass if I were you, this is also a reason why I don't trust Governments and Politicians when they decide that they're god's chosen one and come in the name of peace, the great thing is peace treaties and agreements are fixed so that they don't include supporting other countries with supplies or weaponry, dare I mention Israel and Pakistan?

Congrats you figured out the world is hypocritcal. Hell even cuba decries imperialism but had no reservation acting as the proxy for the soviets for so many years in places as far afield as africa.

[Lethn]

Yeah it's utterly stupid, History is literally the only subject I actually paid attention to in school and even my teacher recognized that I knew the stuff, I just sucked at getting it all down in a format that they'd accept lol. This is why though whenever I see Americans talking about how proud they are of their country or how great their religion is I just burst out laughing because it just shows how bloody ignorant they are and why we constantly get involved in wars over nothing.

[Wufiavelli]

Yeah it's utterly stupid, History is literally the only subject I actually paid attention to in school and even my teacher recognized that I knew the stuff, I just sucked at getting it all down in a format that they'd accept lol. This is why though whenever I see Americans talking about how proud they are of their country or how great their religion is I just burst out laughing because it just shows how bloody ignorant they are and why we constantly get involved in wars over nothing.

There normally for more then nothing. A lot of geopolitcal or greed reasons behind them. Some are good some are not but things are normally a lot deeper then most dumb teens who breeze through a Chomsky book get. The world is pretty much a Gangster land place and its kind of the way the game is played.

real polikic, hobbs, machiavelli, you probably know the spiel by now so i am gonna hold off on the long winded argument.

[Fro]

I've realised there are two kinds of people in the U.S.A; americans and americunts. Nobody likes americunts.

[Weeking]

Mercenaries are better if you have the money and are able to recruit cheap ones from abroad. Norway could just use its oil money reserves and WTFown Sweden just like that. Hundreds of thousand ex-wow farmers marching across the border, shouting communist slogans, confiscating computers and stealing your wow accounts. Then we'll sell them all for profit. It's a win-win situation.

[Wufiavelli]

I've realised there are two kinds of people in the U.S.A; americans and americunts. Nobody likes americunts.

there are people like that in every country, but for some reason people here seem to enjoy blaring the Idiotic American topic across this forum every 5 minutes.

[Fro]

there are people like that in every country, but for some reason people here seemed to enjoy blaring the Idiotic American topic across this forum every 5 minutes.

Its because theres so many americunts compared to americans.

[Nexus]

Guerilla warfare makes me sad http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p54/Fasanoland/Gorilla-Warfare.jpg

[Aragoni]

Guerilla warfare makes me sad http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p54/Fasanoland/Gorilla-Warfare.jpg

Lulz! That's epic! :D

[MattMystrieo]

Guerilla warfare makes me sad http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p54/Fasanoland/Gorilla-Warfare.jpg

Tell you what, thats some good camoflauge.

[Wufiavelli]

Its because theres so many americunts compared to americans.

Its like that in every country. US is not special

[Simmy]

Its like that in every country. US is not special

The Eurofags just shout about it more.

[Spineless_DoO]

Northern Ireland was also mostly a bunch of Gangster and thugs, the British actually turned alot of die Hard nationalist once they became disillusioned from the lack of support they were getting from the higher ups.

Your a fucking idiot. The thugs and gangsters are the fake IRA today. Well not the real IRA. Alot of gangs use that cover to scare people into leaving them alone. That has nothing to do with the men and women who fought long ago to free there country from people who erased there religion, history, ways of life, created slavory, and forced them to live by there laws. They showed up with whatever they had at hand vs a tiranicle empire. Lets not forget how the famine went. You should go to Ireland sometime. You would be supprised its nothing like the English tell you. The history is well documented from the time of the invasion. The English crossed every line Hitler crossed in the proccess. Mounds of dead countrymen, death houses full of women and children working for the English, countless rape and pillage. You would be hard pressed to find a more evil occupation of a country.

[Lethn]

I've never seen such ignorance of history ever, terrorism is terrorism whether you like it or not and are you sure your not talking about the time of William of Orange? If it was then I'd agree with you but for the most part the IRA were actually just catholic extremist terrorists, my dad actually did some diplomatic work with them for awhile I believe so I'm not just talking propaganda here.

Oh and if you want to say I'm being prejudice feel free, but I'm actually half-irish half-english so I can look at either side without being bothered much.

[[Malice]Bronson]

'Probably not able to fend of the U.S. but still."


Probably?!?!
:lmao: Wake up from your dream bro, Sweden would no longer exist 1 minute into the war.

[Wufiavelli]

Your a fucking idiot. The thugs and gangsters are the fake IRA today. Well not the real IRA. Alot of gangs use that cover to scare people into leaving them alone. That has nothing to do with the men and women who fought long ago to free there country from people who erased there religion, history, ways of life, created slavory, and forced them to live by there laws. They showed up with whatever they had at hand vs a tiranicle empire. Lets not forget how the famine went. You should go to Ireland sometime. You would be supprised its nothing like the English tell you. The history is well documented from the time of the invasion. The English crossed every line Hitler crossed in the proccess. Mounds of dead countrymen, death houses full of women and children working for the English, countless rape and pillage. You would be hard pressed to find a more evil occupation of a country.

Yeh lets lump hundreds of years of history together so we can excuse all the bloodshed we want.

I was talking about the IRA today, and the IRA for the past 20 years when the British intelligence has been breaking their fucking back.

You over nationalistic moronic asshat.