one thing I think people dont consider enough when looking at eg the ability of the Taliban to resist US force, or the Viet Cong, or whatever, in the context of the value of small arms is that the US did not adopt the tactic of "kill everyone until the fighting stops"
-
Show this thread
-
yes the US did all sorts of horrible things in these wars and I dont mean to downplay that, only put it in perspective those horrible things tended to be exceptions or edge cases rather than part of a systematic effort to kill everyone until resistance ended
7 replies 1 retweet 176 likesShow this thread -
anyway while yes its true it would have been impossible for the US to adopt such measures in the current environment for a variety of reasons theres no reason to expect that constraint to hold forever in all cases
3 replies 0 retweets 134 likesShow this thread -
so if your plan for revolution or resistance or whatever relies on guerilla warfare to bleed out an external force this might be worth considering
13 replies 1 retweet 131 likesShow this thread -
i should also be clear i am not arguing /for/ a kill everyone strategy. i think it is abominable. but many disagree and they might be able to enact their preferences sooner or later
7 replies 0 retweets 107 likesShow this thread -
5 replies 1 retweet 77 likesShow this thread -
to be extremely extremely clear this is something I hope im wrong about but it might be worth considering what the likelihood of it not being wrong is if this is something important to you idk glhf
9 replies 0 retweets 82 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @eigenrobot
But who should the US have shot? Literally every Vietnamese person??? Or only the ones living North of the 17th parallel?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
they probably shouldnt have shot any of them imo
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.