this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2024
700 points (96.3% liked)

Greentext

4610 readers
1453 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 49 points 3 months ago (22 children)

Yes, because the middle east never happened.

[–] giantofthenorth 30 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Or Vietnam, post war Japan/Germany, the Philippines, the civil war & Wild West, any native American tribe etc.

[–] InternetCitizen2 12 points 3 months ago (2 children)

The issue is about endurance. Are you okay with losing the majority of battles and having x10 the casualties? Not to mention all the left over bombs and chemicals causing deformations long after. A philosopher once said everyone has a plan until you get punched in the face.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago (2 children)

First time I heard anyone call Mike a philosopher.

[–] InternetCitizen2 6 points 3 months ago

When he's right he is right.

[–] TriPolarBearz 3 points 3 months ago

Perhaps a philosofist

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Are you okay with losing the majority of battles and having x10 the casualties?

The thing is that having 10x the casualties tends to create more fighters.

This is why Israel needs to commit total genocide in order to "win" in Gaza and the West Bank. Every time they kill a legitimate Palestinian fighter--versus an uninvolved civilian--they're killing someone that had a family, and friends, people that knew the person, people that loved the person, had probably heard about the injustices (real or perceived; mostly real in the case of Palestinians) from them, and knew why they were taking up arms. These people don't end up being cowed by the violence. Then you add in the people who have their whole families killed by indiscriminate bombing, and no longer feel like they have anything to lose except their shackles.

We know this already. We've known this since WWII. The Axis and Allies both through that bombing civilian population centers--London for the Axis, Dresden for the Allies--would break the will of the people, but instead it hardened them. The concept of total war and mass casualties simply Does. Not. Work.

You can't win wars like this through military force alone, unless you're willing to commit total genocide.

[–] InternetCitizen2 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The thing is that having 10x the casualties tends to create more fighters.

Until it doesn't. Case in point is that large empires exist. Greece has the 300 story, yet were part of Rome and The Ottomans. China has Tibet. US has native lands. I get your point but freedom fighters depend on sponsorship (Haiti bring an exception) and they do exhaust. Still my point is that super powers can be defeated, its just at a very high cost.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

Until it doesn’t.

...And that point is often what we call "genocide", when you've killed so many people that there simply aren't enough left to effectively resist, and then you forcibly assimilate the remainder into your culture.

[–] takeda 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Now, try a swarm of armed drones.

[–] skyspydude1 18 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Because if Ukraine has taught us anything, it's that drones are definitely only limited to large and advanced military powers. There's no way a civilian would ever be able to make something like that

[–] bassomitron 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Ukraine isn't fighting the bulk of their war with drones, so it isn't really an appropriate comparison. One of the main reasons they're still in the fight is the plethora of highly advanced munitions that have been provided to them by NATO members. Lastly, drone warfare has become less and less effective over the last year against Russia. There are lots of countermeasures that can be implemented to take out drones. Hell, if you jam radio signals (which is easy to do), remote controlled drones become virtually useless outside of preprogrammed kamikaze tactics.

Just to clarify, I don't say that to discredit them being a viable and deadly weapon in guerilla warfare. They're very effective in certain situations and quite dangerous. Just pointing out they're not the end-all-be-all of modern warfare.

[–] njm1314 1 points 3 months ago

I'm not sure what you are trying to argue with these examples. Half prove your point, the other half disprove it.

load more comments (18 replies)