It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Who are or were the best guerrilla fighters?

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 11:39 AM
link   
tinhatman just tweaked my interest. What is the publics opinion on the worlds best guerrilla fighters? I would like to throw out the Apache as on of the top fighters. Tinhatman suggested the Afghans. The Masai and Aussie Abos also were mentioned. What does the board think? Also any info on this topic would be greatly appreciated.

respectfully

reluctantpawn

mods feel free to move

[edit on 10-12-2007 by reluctantpawn]




posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 12:06 PM
link   
There have been many guerilla-fighters that could be commended for taking on a far stronger opponent and winning despite the odds against them, usually by a foriegn invading force against a smaller opponent with intimate knowlege of their own back yard and support from the community.

The Viet-Cong would stand out as one of the premier guerilla forces, having sent both the French and American armies running.

Definate candidates for the 'Sun-Tzu' award!



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by citizen smith
 


Definitely the Viet-Cong. The invisible men.

I would say behind them, probably the Chechens in their conflict with Russia. I guess you could categorize them under the Mujhideen, though they seem to be a different caliber.

Even the special forces that trained the Bolivian army in the late 60's said Che Guevara and his band of misfits seemed to be 10 times the fighting force they actually were. They were "astonished" to find out there were only a handful of men.



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Yes the Viet-cong are a good candidate. I know an old tunnel rat and his stories are way to scary. He still has problems in confined spaces. Anyone fighting in their own backyard has an advantage without a doubt. That was one thing that the American revolutionary forces had going for them as well.

respectfully

reluctantpawn



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 01:17 PM
link   
My tanks to dfb and cs both gave worthy nominations. I really thought that this would have received more discussion. It seems no one else has an opinion.

respectfully

reluctantpawn



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 01:44 PM
link   
Viet-Cong then the Afghan Mujahadeen. Comepletely different enviroments but they both have taken on the best; the VC vs. US and France, Muj' vs. Russia and then NATO.

I read a story by a US journalist who travelled with a group of Mujahadeen for 3 days over a mountain while constantly avoiding Russian air patrols just to fire off 4 mortar shells at a Russian base and go home. 3 of the dozen or so Afghans were killed by a Russian rocket attack and they considered the whole operation a huge success because 2 of their mortar shells hit the base with unknown results.

I am surprised they could walk all the way to begin with because their balls must have been ENORMOUS

[edit on 10-12-2007 by Tinhatman]



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tinhatman
Viet-Cong then the Afghan Mujahadeen. Comepletely different enviroments but they both have taken on the best; the VC vs. US and France, Muj' vs. Russia and then NATO.


So how would could you rate the attributes that make a good guerilla-fighter?

In the case of the V.C. it seems to be attitude and ingenuity vs. technology. And in the case of the Mujaheddin it seems to be attitude and altitude vs. technology

Technology may enable the invading aggressor to access information on the fluid dynamics the battlefield faster than the enemy, but the map is not the territory!

If I were asked to pick a No.1 guerilla army though, my candidate would have to be the IRA, for sheer organisational, financing, and conducting of operations (I was one of many witnesses on the scene to one of their most audacious actions on the 15 June 1996 in my home town of Manchester which crippled the economy of the city for many years) and now they have fought their way to the high-negotiations-table at Stormont...aims achieved with both the pen AND the sword.

In accordance with the long-term war-plan they, and many other organised guerilla groups have succeeded, and will continue to succeed.

A depended-on strength by the enemy that sits on their laurels will always be exploited as a weakness by a good commander, no matter how small a band is led

viva la revolucion!

[edit on 10-12-2007 by citizen smith]



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 02:55 PM
link   
I'd have to say the Ghurkas. My grandfather said the were invisible(WW2).

I read once that they were deployed to a possible insurrection and the word that they were just there chilled out the conflict.



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by citizen smith
 


"You don't know football if you're rooting for United!"

I forgot all about my cousins. The IRA. Definitely not in my top 3 but noteworthy none the less. I've read articles with pictures that 'til this day say "No English past this point. IRA on watch!"

I love that kind of spirit.



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
"You don't know football if you're rooting for United!"


I've given you a star for the best quote I've heard in a long time...there are many of us, to use your football analogy, that will live blue, die blue, and will never touch a prawn sandwich no matter how far they get in life


If you have no loyalty to your home-team no matter how bad the losing streak, and willing to change alliegance to Chelsea just because it appears they win more cups, then beware the masses rising when the dominant side is sent home with their tails betwen their legs

Guerilla fighters dont just fight wars, they play sports too

[edit on 10-12-2007 by citizen smith]



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 01:22 AM
link   
What about Americans? Think about how we won aginst the British.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 03:44 AM
link   
What about the Boers in the war against the English. They did pretty well against the Brits who were superior in number and equipment. The only way the Brits could combat the Boer's guerilla warfare was by use of the "scorched earth policy" which basically meant that they burnt many farms to stop the farmers from giving assistance to the Boers(approximately 30,000 farms where burnt). The Brits fought the Boers by bringing in approximately 50,000 troops, building approximately 8,000 block houses to guard main "roads" and put many many Boers and their families into concentration camps. After more than two years war, the Boers finally sat down at the negotiation table to end the war. The Boers gave the Brits a pretty good run for their money though over that two year period!



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 05:01 AM
link   
Americans conducted guerilla operations during the revolution, true, but I don't think they're in any of the top spots. They didn't take to it all that well, for the most part, and even after the success of minor guerilla-style operations was proven, they continued to fight pitched, open-field battles for reasons that I'll never understand.

The French Resistance ranks high in my book, so do the Viet Cong - together they wrote the book on improvised/field-fabricated weaponry.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 01:51 PM
link   
reply to post by intrepid
 


I read a story about these guys and how American troops were pinned down for some time in the trenches during WWI and couldn’t get supplies in our anyone out and finally one Ghurka snuck across under the cover of darkness and beheaded the 2 men in charge and switched the heads on the bodies...It was enough to demoralize the enemy troops. How true it is? I don't know.

It is a tough call...depending on the war and the situation. I wish I could make an educated guess. I think we have learned a lot in the past 100 years about it and it's effectiveness. I think the US and the British did a pretty good job during WWII...but that is a part of history that intrigues me the most...not saying they were the best but definitely worth a mention...some of the things that POW's came up with and accomplished was amazing.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 04:31 PM
link   
It also depends on who is backing the guerillas, and to what extent

The Afghan mujaheddin were equipped with almost-current and some state-of-the-art weaponry (such as Stinger missile units) by the west to aid their fight against the Russians, and are now armed by other backers in their fight against NATO.

That combination of modern warfare technology, combined with their hardy independant attitude and knowledge of their own mountain-backyard makes them almost unbeatable...as Alexander the Great to the current NATO generals have found to their cost.

The Viet-Cong were equipped by the Soviets and Chinese to the same extent, and again relied on local support and their own ingenuity. As someone mentioned earlier, the VC took to using tunnels for logistics and fortification (such as the complex at Cu-Chi) which could house well equipped field-hospitals, move battalions of men and equipment, and as a secure communications route from the front-lines back to the generals

Similar to the Afghanis walking for days to fire a few RPGs on an enemy position, there is an account of the VC storing and stripping a 100+mm field gun and carrying the parts through the tunnels, re-assembling it above ground to fire a few rounds, then rapidly disassembling and disappearing back down the tunnel.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 04:38 PM
link   
There is one guerilla group who's organisation and leader have gone down in the annals of history as rising from lowly freedom-fighting guerilla herdsmen to creating one of the the greatest empires ever known...

...Temujin aka Genghis Khan



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 06:21 PM
link   
These are all great nominations. I still like the Apache. They were never actually defeated in battle. In fact they hid from and often defeated the U.S. Calvary while bringing the entire tribe in tow. Can you imagine hiding out with women, children and the infirmed for years while continually being dogged by a well supplied army such as the U.S. Calvary. True today the people are on reservations on OK an TX. but their continued survival is a triumph considering the genocide that they and the other tribes faced. Plus I must admit I am biased. Their blood runs in my veins.
Another survivor that must be accounted for would have to be the P.L.O. you don't have to believe in their cause to appreciate their tenacity.

respectfully

reluctantpawn

thanks for the replies



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Very biased opinion:

Finnish Army during '39 winter war and especially the Battle of suomussalmi / raate road. A show on how a small (but well trained) military force can rip a larger and better armed army in to pieces.

Suomussalmi
Raate Road

/Bias

Had to vote for my country men.

And we still keep up the tradition, if you think Iraq is bad... we can give you a hell: 250 000 trained soldiers harassing you in freezing forrests... think of a Vietnam with 3 feet of snow and -20C



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
Even the special forces that trained the Bolivian army in the late 60's said Che Guevara and his band of misfits seemed to be 10 times the fighting force they actually were. They were "astonished" to find out there were only a handful of men.



Right. 16 men which split into two groups of 8 once they had been betrayed by the Frenchman. One group was taken out trying to cross a river to escape Bolivia, and the other group with Che got encircled and ganked up. =\

Damn U.S. Green Berets.. shouldn't have gotten involved.

But I think Sunni Muslims fighting in Iraq are exceptional Guerrillas.

As for a commander, Che obviously.



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 09:21 AM
link   
northwolf you guys really kicked some soviet but in that battle. I had never heard of the Winter War before. I think what we have learned here is that a small determined force that knows the terrain can be very successful against a larger opponent. Small groups of people acting independently are harder to infiltrate and can travel faster than a larger group. The also have the advantage of being able to make on the spot decisions that a larger group may not be able to make. Hit and run tactics can demoralize and defeat the enemy as quickly and more effectively than an open confrontation. If the U.S. were to be invaded I believe with as large and diverse as the country is there is probably no way that an enemy could defeat us. The same could be said of other countries as well, such as China. As we well know we have our hands full with the Afghanis and the Iraqis. I just don't see any invading force maintaining control of a large area without the submission of the native people. How then do people think that a NWO will try to control the people.

respectfully

reluctantpawn



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join