this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2024
676 points (96.0% liked)

Greentext

3993 readers
1686 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 37 points 2 days ago (2 children)

This shows ignorance in history but also understanding of warfare. There are too many examples of this: Vietnam as a historical example and Afghanistan as a recent one. Let's not forget what's going on in Israel rn vs all the proxies. It's not necessary to have advanced weaponry to fight a war.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago

Vietnam as a historical example and Afghanistan as a recent one.

The biggest asset these countries had in their favor was distance from the American industrial core. First Nations people employed many of the same techniques used in Vietnam and Afghanistan but were ruthlessly slaughtered. Guerrilla movements in Latin America - the FARK in Columbia and socialists in Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador got massacred by American military power. These countries are wholly within the US sphere of influence now.

Let’s not forget what’s going on in Israel rn vs all the proxies.

Israel is a textbook case of advanced weaponry tilting the playing field. Air superiority, naval support from the US, and a high tech anti-missile/anti-personal system along with one of the most advanced spy networks in the world all allow this relatively tiny nation to punch far outside its weight class. By contrast, less developed countries like Egypt, Iraq, Libya, and Sudan routinely serve as punching bags for more advanced states.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Vietnam had field artillery and Soviet fighter jets. They were a real army.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Sure, but a large portion of their fighting against the French and Americans was through guerilla warfare and tactics.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Yeah, and the only reason they won is because it was a logistical nightmare for the country on the other side of the world.

That wouldn't be the case for a civil war. They have all their army equipment right there.