6 ms·
Its one of those features of asymmetric warfare, that you can drag the enemy into the moral-mud-pits of combating opposition among the civilian population. For
by Pica_soO 8y ago
Its one of those features of asymmetric warfare, that you can drag the enemy into the moral-mud-pits of combating opposition among the civilian population.
For the opposite side this has the benefit of getting new recruits among the relatives and survivors and obviously of leading a far superior enemy by the noose ring through the public arena -which raises Opposition in a democracy - and reduces combat effectiveness in the military in dictatorships and democracy's (sovjet afghanistan).
I would really love to have the CIAs Information on how much vietnamese population was in active opposition to the american "police" action. My estimate would be around 75 %.
- michaelmrose 8y agoIf the Vianamese were over here what percentage of Americans would be in active opposition immediately? What percentage after almost everyone saw friends and relatives slaughtered?
- Pica_soO 8y agoThe problem is, that it to the politicians of the time made absolut sense. Socialism seemed unstoppable, while spreading through the world. The US never understood that nationalism in the released colonys always dressed up as opposition to the politics of the leaving colonial force- which usually was capitalistic. Declaring war, should be a slower process, with plenty of time to disprove lies and allowing for illusions to fail. At the same time, the UN should have been able to resolve some issues more practically: Major parts of the world would have benefited from a reallocation and consolidation of areas (of future nations), not by colonial markers on maps, but by by ethnicity -as it happened between India and Pakistan. Imagine that very same boiling battlefield that was/is Iraq and Syria, but instead with two half-merged nation states having nukes. Delusions are strong on both sides of the political spectrum.