posted on Nov, 29 2011 @ 10:28 AM
Originally posted by nagabonar
Originally posted by aaronez
When its nukes against nukes, conventional weapon contest doesn't really make a difference.
I disagree, when it's nukes in the background, proxy wars involving manouvers through allies have appeared, and conventional warfare often becomes
underground black ops. The role can tactically change face with conventional warfare, giving the impression of diminishing, but it doesn't rule it out
because heavy-duty backup exists in the form of nukes. Everything happens regionally, someplace or another, and the contest becomes subdivided,
patroned through proxy interests, supressed and driven underground, however garnished by concerns as it may be, but ambitions are still and often
played out conventionally, wouldn't you say?
...proxy wars were common in the Cold War, when a direct armed conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union could have destroyed the
The people doing the actual fighting in a proxy war are not in it specifically to pursue the patron's goals. They have their own reasons for fighting
-- but those reasons dovetail with the patron's strategy.
I geuss I'll put a spelling mistake in this thread too.
edit on 29-11-2011 by Northwarden because: removed a quote tag