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"
-
-
The doctrine was very clearly to stack bodies high until the North Vietnamese surrendered. The fact that there were some METHODS that they were unwilling to use to achieve is irrelevant to your initial claim, which is just patently false.
-
why are you taking this conversational stance
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Olive branch: If you want to talk about small arms having value in the age of nuclear weapons, then I agree. But I think you will need a new characterization of why they are still relevant.
-
I think more generally I'm happy to concede being wrong about Vietnam, and absolutely there are cases where scorched earth approaches have failed I just don't think they always do or always will and it's gonna get really ugly with advances in automation and/or biology
- Show replies
New conversation -
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.