Hopefully, that’ll be a lesson to you- discount Rumsfeld’s military assessments.
Rumsfeld wouldn’t lie to us would he?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2830-2003Jul16.html?nav=hptop_tb
Then again I am sure plenty changed since Sunday. :rolleyes:
I base my opinion on two tours in Vietnam with the Marine Corp and 18 months with a private security firm but I think you’ll find it’s pretty close to the standard military definition.
Crew Served Weapons would include mortars and belt fed automatic weapons. Their use implies an organized logistical system and technical training. Small arms are low maintenance by design but without proper care these weapons become junkiron.
Squad level tactics is also another indicator and would probably include the Shining Path although I haven’t kept up on them. To effectively maneuver a dozen men requires training and discipline not normally found in your homegrown bandit. Unless properly planned and executed the ambusher can become the ambushee very quickly.
But the Iraqis WERE using “squad level tactics,” if by that you mean “several guys working together to attack and get away more or less successfully” yet you would not accept them as guerrillas until they pulled out a mortar. Why not?
Your definition if a guerrilla is, at best, obsolete, basing it as you do on use of belt-fed machine guns and mortars. The need for crew served weapons is reduced when assault rifles and RPGs can be carried by every man in the unit.
And, for that matter, what does your time with a security firm have to do with the topic at hand?
Thanks to the Cubans and the Russians, a cushy security job chasing mostly machete wielding bandits off my employers land turned into a fullfledged war. My contract was 18 months and I did not renew it.
Now that I’ve qualified myself,it’s your turn. Do you know the difference in firepower between an AK and a 50 cal.? How about the difference between a sniper and an ambush? How about fire discipline? “Squad level tactics” is an exact discipline,not a bunch of guys going out to attack something. Do you know what it takes to actually hit a specific target with a mortar round? I’m sure you do but you’re just kidding with that last post.
NO, no kids, gotta keep the gorillas away from the cows 'cause that just ain’t pretty!!
(Sorry for the drive-by, I couldn’t restrain myself but promise substance, wit, and analysis next time round!)
I suspected that was the case. I didn’t think you’d use snoozing in front of the security monitors at a suburban office building as a qualification. 
Can’t talk much right now but I found an interesting link, an exerpt from Che Guevara’s famous book on guerrilla warfare: http://www.che-lives.com/home/guerilla.shtml . He liked fifties, too, when he could steal one. Expensive to feed, totally expendable because of their being not real portable, but useful defending a fixed position.
(doing a happpy dance of understanding)
I get why Read_Neck and I keep talking past each other! He was trained in the United States military of the late 60s or early 70s. The military does not believe in sending in its men unless they are armed better than their opponents. They insist on having a proper supply chain, absolute air superiority, and overwhelming armor and artillery support. You know, do it right, and as a person who just missed an opportunity to experience that firsthand I can appreciate it. When he thinks of guerillas he thinks of commandos. Fair enough. I was raised in that belief system, with Seversky’s Victory Through Airpower on the same shelf as the family Bible. And I’m sure the guerillas in Iraq would dearly love a few SCUDs, MiGs, and Hind gunships.
On the other hand, during that same period I was a “junior revolutionary,” studying the works of Marx and Mao while going to weekly Teenaged Republicans meetings. (I still haven’t convinced myself that it was to “work within the system” rather than “for the chicks.”) When I think of guerillas I think of resistance fighters. (Doesn’t hurt that I used to hang out with a Cuban revolutionary who had a falling out with Fidel. Fun stories of things like blowing up phone lines and getting shot in the butt.)
So, I think I’m at a point where I understand (a little) Read_Neck’s point of view and why his and mine are different, but both equally valid. We are looking through different ends of the same telescope.
Fucking ew.
Mate, why do you even bother arguing with Read? He’s obviously too dense to understand anything you say to him. Ignore him.
He is one of the few Dopers (or people in general), I’ve ever seen, who, when presented with contrary evidences said, 'Oh. I guess I was wrong." RN did say that he thought it was a guerilla war.