how do you reliably win against an insurgency?

how do you reliably win against an insurgency?

doesnt matter how abhorrent the methods im just wondering if its even possible

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Kill all the men and breed the women.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Get the people on your side

      Deny the enemy resources

      Prevent them from moving to other places to wait you out

      Destroy the insurgency by violence or coercion

      Unironically the answer is either of these.
      Western forces are uniquely poor against insurgencies because they try to do a combination of both, which is obviously moronic. Either delenda est or make love not war, you can't do both.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        they do neither actually. Western powers dont actually care about insurgents.
        what matters is surrounding Iran because Iran has an IQ average above 90 which makes them a threat to Israel.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Western forces are uniquely bad at fighting insurgencies because after overthrowing the old regime, the new regime they installed was all about Black folk and trannies, making them wish the old regime was back.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You need to gain the support of the people. If you go hard and shoot every boy who approaches a soldier for fear he's a suicide bomber, you're going to turn the population further against you and help create more suicide bombers.
    Of course, this is extremely costly and not always an entirely realistic outcome, which is what the insurgents want.

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Get the people on your side

    Deny the enemy resources

    Prevent them from moving to other places to wait you out

    Destroy the insurgency by violence or coercion

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You posted the picture m8. The British won that war with concentration camps and block houses

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      any way of doing it without squemish liberals in the US throwing a massive b***h fit and sanctioning you like they did in south africa and Rhodesia

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        move to Russia

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          im from Ireland

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            then you should know internment and death squads don't do shit
            tiocfaidh bhur lá

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            stfu dude you sound like the dorks i went to school with

            spouting that phrase then failure irish class

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            [...]
            cont.

            the british were actually very soft on the irish, they wanted to set up interment camps but decided against it because of the expected negative reation from the US who they needed to pay back debt to form ww1

            realistically i truly believe they had a decent chance to kill us all but they failed for the same reason mentioned by another poster earlier,

            insurgencies rely on their enemies compassion

            west brit cuck

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            do you have a point

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            yes, you're a traitor to your own people and would rent out your mother's c**t to the first anglo who offered you a pound

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            im literally just pointing out an historical fact that if the british who outnumbered us and outgunned us had played dirty theyd probably have mogged us.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            yes, you're a traitor to your own people and would rent out your mother's c**t to the first anglo who offered you a pound

            they beat the boers, a proud and ferocious people with the same tactics, had they implemented it here we would probably have lost you moron

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            stfu dude you sound like the dorks i went to school with

            spouting that phrase then failure irish class

            cont.

            the british were actually very soft on the irish, they wanted to set up interment camps but decided against it because of the expected negative reation from the US who they needed to pay back debt to form ww1

            realistically i truly believe they had a decent chance to kill us all but they failed for the same reason mentioned by another poster earlier,

            insurgencies rely on their enemies compassion

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Put down the whiskey.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            do you have a point

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Genocide usually solves it because insurgents rely upon the mercy of the superior force.
    They can build safe areas within community centers and rely on the general population for support.
    Whereas you remove these things, insurgents are no different from a routed army.

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Chud Anon

    >how do you reliably win against an insurgency?

    British Empire style.

    Arm local factions and play them against each other, make them reliant on you for support.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      they tried this in Afghanistan all it did was breed a bunch of fat muslim leeches who swallowed up US funding and then fricked off to saudi arabia when the taliban were knocking on their door

      • 3 weeks ago
        Chud Anon

        >make them reliant on you for support

        That was the part of the equation we took away when we left. They knew their money and support structure was gone so they fricked off. Bongs had no intention of leaving their colonies, and thus had friendly tribal ooga boogas killing enemy tribal ooga boogas for a few centuries as they extracted the surrounding resources.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Have a competent governing authority that can deploy adequate force levels such that there is a permanent, meaningful, non-abusive presence everywhere. If you're attempting COIN in another country and your strategy is "we don't have many dudes and our local partners are corrupt and incompetent, but we do have superior firepower and mobility, so we're going to secure areas, hand them off to our partners, then move on to secure new areas blasting baddies all the way" then you're not going to succeed.

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You don'
    Statist cucks still haven't learned that the state isn't God and in fact, are on the way out
    Non-state actor Chads are rising

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The moral way is to get the people on your side. This is sometimes impossible. The immoral way is to just kill the people until they can't fight back anymore.

    Demographers estimated that births equaled deaths in Afghanistan during the Soviet/Afghan war, resulting in an stable population size during the conflict (i.e., 0% net population loss). During the duration of the US/Afghan conflict the Afghan population has doubled (i.e., 100% population gain). In both conflicts the estimated number of Afghan casualties are balanced by a high birth rate thus, from the mujahideen/taliban perspective, there is little motivation to make concessions required for peace. They can carry on the fight indefinitely. Suffice to say, the Soviets and Americans both failed to make the nation submit.

    Why don't we look at the few people who actually conquered Afghanistan and see how they did it?

    Babur unified Afghanistan in 1500s. He make moral claim to rule by being a descendent of Timur and Genghis Khan. He enforced claim by stacking towers of severed heads wherever the claim was contested. Babur also seems to have been a poet and the author of his own biography. Today he is held forth by modern scholars as an enlightened ruler despite the skull towers.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      And how did Timur conquer Afghanistan in 1400s? Timor established moral claim by first installing a descendant of Genghis Khan as a ruler while he served as the true leader of his empire. Later he took a descendant of Genghis Khan as a wife. He fought his entire life to expand his empire and enforced his claim to rule with violence. In wars stretching from Russia to Syria to India his armies killed an estimated 5% of the world population over his lifetime. His usual method on campaign was to treat cities that surrendered generously while treating cities that rebelled harshly (cementing captured defenders alive inside walls, head-stacking mountains, etc).

      Both of them, when faced with peoples unwilling to submit, would cause enough deaths to cause massive population losses so that the people would become unable to resist anymore.

      Every nation has a "head-stacking threshold", a certain percentage of population loss that they have to suffer in order to submit

      For modern civilized countries that would be something from 2% to 6%
      For countries that were more like pre-modern societies, that could range from 10% to 30%

      In order to subjugate primitive yet nationalistic nations like Afghanistan or Vietnam, one would need to cause them to suffer a net population loss roughly that high.

      Because the Soviets and Americans refused to be that extreme, (likely due to wanting to avoid allegations of Fascism) they failed to succeed in conquering these nations.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The Romans did it with iron age technology ina region whose terrain is basically EuroAfganistan;

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantabrian_Wars

    the answer is of course, obvious and expected.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      they just killed everyone?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Can’t have an insurgency if everyone is dead

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Mongols did it in AfghanistanAfghanistan

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    - crush open insurgents (camps, etc) mercilessly
    - give the people a reason to be on your side and against the insurgents. jobs, handouts, stuff that is incompatible with the insurgents ideology
    - prop local groups that are incompatible with the insurgents or otherwise opposed. dont just give them money, but force them to start winning hearts and minds where you cant
    - false flag atrocities to make the population turn against the insurgents
    - infiltrate the insurgent group, gather intelligence and spread dissonance where possible
    - create fake insurgent groups to attract wannabes. kill them and blame the real insurgents for their deaths.

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    out breed them. looks like roaches are loosing on that front

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I used to play War of Rights with a guy who was part of the USMC presence in Somalia during the late-1980s until the US completely pulled out in 1995 (Marine Security Guard IIRC). He said with Somalis was that you had to be brutal with them, but also respect them at the same time. He wouldn't elaborate further on that sadly. I took it as to mean that brutality garnered a certain level of respect in Somali society (presumably by showing that you were serious and shouldn't be taken advantage of), but that going overboard with it would unite everyone against you.

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Cut off as much of their resources as possible. Restrict all supply lines, block all trade ports, lock down their borders, then its just a war of attrition. Directly attacking an insurgency is foolish, you have to isolate them to reduce them as a threat. This is obviously the most expensive and slowest way to wage a war, but nobody said waging such wars would be cheap

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You exterminate the group in question. This isn't really possible because people travel outside your jurisdiction, but that's about it if you're looking for "reliable".

    The other way to "win" is to just not "play" in the first place, you must have fricked up if there's an insurgency to begin with.

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Slaughter everyone or turn them against each other

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Improve living stardards.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *