|
08-14-2006, 12:47 AM | #1 |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Students of History, SU and others
Is anybody aware of any conflicts where the combatants were interspersed partially throughout a population and some of the combatants used terror against civilian populations where the subduing power won?
The closest I have come, is in the UK Northern Ireland conflict. However, I'm not certain that Britain ever succeeded in the Middle East or India. Any world historians aware of any situations where the terroists ultimately did not win, i.e., driving the "occupiers" from their lands?
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
08-14-2006, 01:12 AM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Bluth Home
Posts: 3,877
|
How about the American Civil War?
__________________
The Bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go. -Galileo |
08-14-2006, 01:22 AM | #3 |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Not really.
In that one, one side had an army which could be defeated and thus occupation set in. I imagine there were some terroistic actions taken after the War, but ... I don't think that qualifies.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
08-14-2006, 03:49 PM | #4 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
Quote:
I'm not aware of a committed guerilla war ever failing.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster Last edited by SeattleUte; 08-14-2006 at 07:21 PM. |
|
08-14-2006, 03:52 PM | #5 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
The US should rarely if ever anticipate becoming an occupying force. Hit and run should be the only policy ever envisaged, given our limited political resolve.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
08-15-2006, 02:47 AM | #6 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: South Jordan, UT
Posts: 1,799
|
Quote:
|
|
08-15-2006, 09:34 PM | #7 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
Quote:
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster Last edited by SeattleUte; 08-15-2006 at 09:51 PM. |
|
08-15-2006, 09:52 PM | #8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
|
Quote:
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos. |
|
08-15-2006, 10:45 PM | #9 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
Quote:
"One of the most obvious and advantageous departures from the so-called laws of war is the action of scattered groups against men pressed together in a mass. Such action always occurs in wars that take on a national character. In such actions, instead of two crowds opposing each other, the men disperse, attack singly, run away when attacked by stronger forces, but again attack when opportunity offers. This was done by the guerrillas in Spain, by the mountain tribes in the Caucasus, and by the Russians in 1812. People have called this kind of war 'guerrilla warfare' and assume that by so calling it they have explained its meaning. But such a war does not fit in under any rule and is directly opposed to a well-known rule of tactics which is accepted as infallible. That rule says that an attacker should concentrate his forces in order to be stronger than his opponent at the moment of conflict. Guerrilla war (always successful, as history shows) directly infringes that rule." Name a guerrrilla war that has failed.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster |
|
08-16-2006, 03:39 AM | #10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
|
Quote:
Was the French Resistance in WWII guerrilla warfare?
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos. |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|