Civilian deaths (North and South Vietnam) 405,000–627,000
The Korean War (1950–1953) resulted in a massive civilian death toll, with estimates ranging from 1.5 million to over 3 million, often cited as exceeding 50% of total casualties
The quintessential example is the US (and USSR before us) in Afghanistan. Yes, the Taliban and the Brave Mujaheddin Fighters ™. And… hit and run tactics… sort of worked. Moreso against the USSR where those militias were being armed by a different military superpower… and where the USSR troops were already behind the curve gear wise. Against the US? It is less that the Taliban et al “won” and more that we lost. We were bled out during an unpopular war where we had no meaningful objectives and no desire to actually fight and kind of just… left.
You aren’t going to bleed out the US Military to the point that they and the christofacists leave the continental US (or even Hawaii… Alaska we would sell to putin in a heartbeat). Instead, you are going to see something a lot closer to the nazi occupation of Western Europe where you just have mass punitive executions until people turn on the guerillas.
We aren’t at the point of pitched battles. People are calling for resistance.
And of we do end up at all out war with the government, the military will likely shatter and be considerably less effective than the military that couldn’t defeat the Taliban.
And do you think this would be a popular war? Fairly certain it would be less popular than any war the US ever fought including the US civil war. That at least had a purpose a reasonable number of people supported.
Which is a very different topic than “Just going to ignore all the times modern militaries have lost to insurgent groups”
But sure, let’s address your new argument while ignoring the old one:
People are calling for resistance.
Yes. And we need to understand what resistance is going to make a difference. One person owning a gun to protect themselves… isn’t even going to accomplish the stated goal. A well trained militia… ignoring the fact that getting one of those takes a lot more time than we have, is also going to be of very questionable value once the civil war goes hot.
But going to protests and speaking to the community organizers and figuring out how to protect each other? THAT is proving incredibly effective… at least for this phase.
And of we do end up at all out war with the government, the military will likely shatter
Having spent years having to work with military folk and officers… I doubt it. That is an entire org built around “just following orders” and “being apolitical because I serve the office, not the man”. Yes, people will bitch and moan. But they’ll get told “It doesn’t matter if you agree or disagree with the war. What matters is that you look out for the man in the trench next to you”. And once the bullets start coming back, they will gladly hose down however many protesters or militia soldiers they can because “it is them or us”.
be considerably less effective than the military that couldn’t defeat the Taliban.
Again, the Taliban did not defeat the military. The US government did. In fact, in most skirmishes (that weren’t just ambushes and IEDs), we massacred them.
Because, “victory” in that case is convincing the christofacists to leave “their country”. Which is the exact same reason the taliban just stuck around, waited for the coalition to leave, and went back to oppressing people.
But this also has the added factor that we already see with fuckface: It won’t take too many massacres by the military before the soldiers that we thank for their service realize they will be massacred if they lose.
The only way a civil war goes beyond “We put down isolated groups of terrorists” is if the military (whatever branches) tends to align with different forks of the government. I… am not optimistic with that and suspect any isolated bases deciding to not support the christofacists will realize how quickly they run out of supplies. But it could happen.
The militias will, at best, be cannon fodder to stand in trenches. Which… is what we see in Ukraine. Trained soldiers can engage in maneuver combat and take ground. Conscripts/militia can get given a gun, pointed in a general direction, and try to prevent those maneuvers from working. But a well equipped combat force is still going to steamroll over them.
Just going to ignore all the times modern militaries have lost to insurgent groups?
Civilian deaths (North and South Vietnam) 405,000–627,000
The Korean War (1950–1953) resulted in a massive civilian death toll, with estimates ranging from 1.5 million to over 3 million, often cited as exceeding 50% of total casualties
…
Not including combatant casualties.
In skirmishes? Sure.
In terms of wars? Not so much.
The quintessential example is the US (and USSR before us) in Afghanistan. Yes, the Taliban and the Brave Mujaheddin Fighters ™. And… hit and run tactics… sort of worked. Moreso against the USSR where those militias were being armed by a different military superpower… and where the USSR troops were already behind the curve gear wise. Against the US? It is less that the Taliban et al “won” and more that we lost. We were bled out during an unpopular war where we had no meaningful objectives and no desire to actually fight and kind of just… left.
You aren’t going to bleed out the US Military to the point that they and the christofacists leave the continental US (or even Hawaii… Alaska we would sell to putin in a heartbeat). Instead, you are going to see something a lot closer to the nazi occupation of Western Europe where you just have mass punitive executions until people turn on the guerillas.
We aren’t at the point of pitched battles. People are calling for resistance.
And of we do end up at all out war with the government, the military will likely shatter and be considerably less effective than the military that couldn’t defeat the Taliban.
And do you think this would be a popular war? Fairly certain it would be less popular than any war the US ever fought including the US civil war. That at least had a purpose a reasonable number of people supported.
Which is a very different topic than “Just going to ignore all the times modern militaries have lost to insurgent groups”
But sure, let’s address your new argument while ignoring the old one:
Yes. And we need to understand what resistance is going to make a difference. One person owning a gun to protect themselves… isn’t even going to accomplish the stated goal. A well trained militia… ignoring the fact that getting one of those takes a lot more time than we have, is also going to be of very questionable value once the civil war goes hot.
But going to protests and speaking to the community organizers and figuring out how to protect each other? THAT is proving incredibly effective… at least for this phase.
Having spent years having to work with military folk and officers… I doubt it. That is an entire org built around “just following orders” and “being apolitical because I serve the office, not the man”. Yes, people will bitch and moan. But they’ll get told “It doesn’t matter if you agree or disagree with the war. What matters is that you look out for the man in the trench next to you”. And once the bullets start coming back, they will gladly hose down however many protesters or militia soldiers they can because “it is them or us”.
Again, the Taliban did not defeat the military. The US government did. In fact, in most skirmishes (that weren’t just ambushes and IEDs), we massacred them.
Because, “victory” in that case is convincing the christofacists to leave “their country”. Which is the exact same reason the taliban just stuck around, waited for the coalition to leave, and went back to oppressing people.
But this also has the added factor that we already see with fuckface: It won’t take too many massacres by the military before the soldiers that we thank for their service realize they will be massacred if they lose.
The only way a civil war goes beyond “We put down isolated groups of terrorists” is if the military (whatever branches) tends to align with different forks of the government. I… am not optimistic with that and suspect any isolated bases deciding to not support the christofacists will realize how quickly they run out of supplies. But it could happen.
The militias will, at best, be cannon fodder to stand in trenches. Which… is what we see in Ukraine. Trained soldiers can engage in maneuver combat and take ground. Conscripts/militia can get given a gun, pointed in a general direction, and try to prevent those maneuvers from working. But a well equipped combat force is still going to steamroll over them.