Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

ziq wrote (edited )

Vietnam says yes.

EDIT: Knock on wood. Don't want them re-invading the place just to stop people from pointing out that Vietnam beat them.

11

Bandit wrote

One essential part of this was how the troops within the US army rebelled against it.

See fragging.

Doing internal work on the structures of the army itself seems essential to defeating it.

Beyond that, broad popular power would work against the army (which would happen together with internal dissent). But this is a hard when you're up against the various propaganda/sabotage/espionage capacities involved.

3

celebratedrecluse wrote

In open battle? no way, the US Air force is absurdly OP. I've been waiting for the devs to recalibrate their stats so online play is more fun.

But seriusly, this really depends how you frame the question. What are you trying to achieve? Invade the US homeland? That's an absurd enterprise, nobody would ever succeed at that without the widespread support of gun owners throughout at least the part of the country youre occupying. The US literally has more guns than people. Otherwise you end up not only fighting the government/military, but an epic insurgency, which will be nearly impossible to defeat even with virtually unlimited resources. So the US itself? Basically impregnable, at least in the lower 48, I wouldn't suggest any country try that because it would ruin them and probably start a global thermonuclear war.

What about another country? Well, Iraq and Vietnam kicked the US' ass, but at what cost? The US' strategy is to use its air force to bomb people into submission, and simultaneously use overwhelming occupying armies to go in and enforce the new laws/government they prop up. Its inefficient, but it does cause a lot of casualties for the insurgents. However, its never really worked, because the US isnt settler colonizing these places, theyre just going home eventually, and after that basically things return to the control of other parties. So you could say its a defeat,but a pyrric one...

Honestly, don't try to fight the US military. Its not meant to be fought, you can't really "win", just try to have your community survive amidst massive and devastating losses-- materially, spiritually, culturally. You need to outmaneuver them, use geopolitics and cunning to protect what you want to protect. Same goes for any other major military, frankly. Assymetric warfare is deadly to those that practice it, and isnt to be taken lightly. Its a last resort, and you (personally, as someone considering employing it as your tactic) will probably die in the course of conducting it

7

RedEmmaSpeaksA wrote

Obviously facing them head on will never work. Really all you can do is keep going and wait it out. Empires are inherently unstable and they will eventually overreach and collapse. Until then, do what you can to protect the people who need it.

4

existential1 wrote

As others have stated, it depends on the context. Traditional warfare on "neutral" grounds? Cyberwarfare? Economic warfare? Cultural (not the kind white ppl talk about) warfare?

3

onemanarmy wrote

" If all the gangs in the world unified, We stand a chance against the military tonight " - Ab Soul

3

nosho18 wrote

"Take up arms, but do everything in your power to make their use unnecessary. Against the army, the only victory is political."

2

christhegrifter wrote

In the event of a revolution against their tyranny, the priorities of USGOV will be:

Preserve Infrastructure

Maintain Normalcy

Eliminate the Terrorists/Insurgents/People who don't want to be arrested for jaywalking, public assembly or collecting rainwater

in descending order.

Trump and da bois can't bomb your city/town/even your rural area in a lot of cases because dropping bombs on US territories is BAD. BAD BAD FOR PR. Bombs falling/B1 bombers in the sky means:

Public anxiety over safety

Inevitable collateral damage

which both mean damaged infrastructure and people refusing to come to work, weakening the economy/ american logistic network AND increasing sympathies to the rebel groups, given that they AREN'T the ones bombing Dallas/New York/LA/Miami/Omaha/whatever.

This means ZERO strategic warfare is actually viable (strategic warfare being Mass Bombing, Artillery Use or Huge Troop Movements).

What we will have in the event of an insurgent uprising will be a police state; you might see soldiers with automatic weapons on the street (well, more of them, anyway) and maybe some armored vehicles. These CAN be beaten.

tl;dr: as a foreign power, especially in a place that is classified by the public as 'full of sand'; no - not at all. as a citizen uprising - very possibly.

2