Well you could definitely cause them a lot of trouble. But the cost of forcing them out via insurgency would likely be around ten years of occupation and potentially hundreds of thousands of dead Czechs.
Something you want to avoid if you can.
We would not be able to field enough to counter them head on anyway. This is country of 10M, Russia has 180M. The best bet would be making it into another Afghanistan for Russians.
Rebels in Allepo are conducting position warfare, I was talking about guerrilla warfare everywhere and nowhere within the territory of the country.
The Afghans are at war the moment they leave the womb . Most canât shoot but they know how to fight .
You know how to shoot but not how to fight .
All you would create is a shit ton of hind videos of them wiping you out .
Donât get me wrong youâd be a pain in the arse but your not afngans and you donât have the access to kit and expertise that the Afghans have .
Some kids in the taliban have been learning to kill and make bombs from the age of about 4 or sometimes less . A bunch of liberal fucktards with guns donât quite have the same effect âŠno offence
They are conducting urban guerrilla warfare . Small groups holding a building . Bogging down a larger force then pulling but now they have reached the issue of being surrounded and no longer room to manoeuvre. So yes now they are making a final stand .
They are being blown the fuck out of by sheer amounts of air power . Your tale of the Czechs against the Germans is heroic and deserves credit yes but they were not facing precision air attacks , cluster bombs and just about everything else.
You are missing the point. Syrian civil war has been conducted as position warfare for a very long time. Same in Aleppo.
The article I linked showed real guerrilla warfare. When Germans wanted to deal with 200 fighters, they had to mount 10.000 soldiers to comb their area of operation. After a week the 10.000 managed to get less than dozen while losing 6. They didnât achieve the objective and once the 10.000 were needed elsewhere Germans again started losing troops, trucks, material (e.g. whole train full of gas - which was a great deal at that time of the war), etc.
Had Aleppo been guerrilla war the government troops would already have control of the city, while losing lower number of troops everywhere else. Once they would concentrate on the other place, they would start losing troops in Aleppo.
That is, of course, possible only when the local population is friendly to the fighters.
The idea is not winning, it is about making it impossible for the enemy to achieve a clear victory.
cough, cough raises hand 
2 Likes
If you are willing to relocate to Prague I suppose it could be arranged.
I know, that opportunity is still out of reach sadly.
Never gonna let that dream of a select few private steam beta. Its to messy to control but I can dream dammit!
1 Like
Donât bother raising your hand . Use it to cover your mouth next time you cough . Dirty bastard
5 Likes
This will be difficult, Tomas does not speak english very well, so for the QA department it is important that you are able to speak czech.
well, yes. That would be a difficulty, but i think it would not be completely out of the question
I donât think the Afgans could really fight they way they do now, before the CIA trained them. There would obviously be Czech soldiers ( and troops from other countries) who could train the locals to fight.
To do that, you have to fight them for years, which as i stated above would likely cost a lot in blood.
Better just to have a strong enough conventional force to deter an potential invasion.
Yes indeed howâs that worked in Iraq though ? Not very fucking well .
The afghans have been involved in war for decades long before the US could even locate them on a map .
Tribal wars are pretty everyday out there . They are experts on warfare take no credit from them . They are hardened men .
Most people in the west are soft they wouldnât last two seconds against a young Afghan male . Let alone a large conventional force . The Czech Republic would be lucky if it lasted a few days against a large organised invasion force .
It would be them down to its allies to take it back . Same
For the majority of Europe to be honest
Not a good comparison. The Iraqis have no will to fight, and theyâre not fighting a guerrilla war against ISIS.
And yet trained western soldiers would wipe the floor with them 9/10 times in a fire fight would they not?
You realise weâre not talking about a conventional war right?
You havenât provided any real reason why the Czech civilians couldnât be trained to wage an insurgency against an occupying force, other than âthey arenât the Afgansâ. Because apparently your ability to be trained to fight revolves around you having a rough child hood.
And yet they were getting thrashed by the Russians until the CIA started providing them with training.
The Zulus were experts in Tribal warfare, and how did they end up?
what about in syria then ? not going well there either .
its very hard to train a force from scratch and reengage them into a very fluid war . it would take months to get any sort of combat effective force together from a bunch of civies with no combat experience . sticking with the czech republic . the country wouldnt have a matter of months . if we were discussing the US then yes because i would have faith that the US military could hold an invasion force at bay even if completely out matched (unlikely ) for some time allowing civilians to be trained and then deployed in support of regular units .
but a small nation like czech republic ? no chance .
its somewhat worked in ukraine for the reason that the entire country is not engulfed in war and its generally a war thats moves a few meters a day rather than miles .
win the firefight yes . wipe them out ? no . generally they just vanish into the country side through tunnels , irrigation ditches etc . then come back and have another go the next day creating an endless cat and mouse .
if we took the gloves off and used our full range of air assets and a attitude to hunt the enemy down and destroy them then yes the taliban wouldnt last long .
that however isnt the case we are/were there to defend and provide security not to wage war . A point that was continuously drummed into you therefore we did not go out seeking a firefight we went out to patrol then return to our previous position . if we were engaged we were to fight them off but not to pursue .
i dont think an invading force would operate in the same manor do you ? any invasion again using russia as an example it would likely go the same as Crimea . they would secure most if not all major strategic position in the first few hours/days then work from there .
they could be however it wouldnt be effective without a conventional force coming behind to secure the country . why would the US for example pump millions of pounds into funding a guerrilla force to fight a war it had zero chance of ever actually winning ? it wouldnt .
otherwise they would be doing it now in crimea .
if they wanted to go down the route of raising a milita then they would do it with the view that it would be there to provide support for a NATO conventional force to come in behind and actually win the war . the french resistance in the 40âs for example was funded because they were of huge assistance in the build up to D-day not because we thought they could kick the germans out of france .
so thats why im talking about a conventional war . without external help 150,000 czechs with nothing more than rifles and pistols is hardly gonna last long against an armoured force with air power supported as well as a trained well equipped infantry force .
they wouldnt win a single firefight .
exactly so how do you expect the czechs to stack up ?
not to bad to be fair to them .
again your going against your own argument , if the zulus couldnt do it with all there expertese how do you expect @snejdarek and his pals to pull it off ?
good news !
1 Like
Good indeed. TIme to move forward.
Iâve seen interview with some Iraqi Christians that got relocated here. The guy said that as Christians they were not allowed to be armed so once the government pulled out they were all for taking for ISIS.
Sadly, the interview didnât go into greater detail about them ânot being allowed to own gunsâ.
But yeah, if the estimate is 5.000 ISIS fuckers in 1.5mil Mosul⊠It is beyond comprehension that ISIS could hold it even though it seems that their support among locals is not that high.[quote=âTheDivineInfidel, post:2853, topic:27880â]
what about in syria then ? not going well there either .
[/quote]
Syria is different in that it is sectarian.
Here you have homogenous population that would entirely support any insurgent activity, or at least not stay in the way of it.
That is why Heydrich called Czechs âthe laughing hyenasâ.
Again, you are still thinking of it in terms of conventional warfare. Think of it more like losing 50 soldiers a day while being able to target a handful of perps a month in return.
50 a day is insignificant number in Russian terms, but it stacks up over time, especially if you canât reach the main goal.
you wouldnt kill that many a day . they would kill more of you than you would of them , you dont have the kit to fight a guerrilla warfare do you seriously believe a few rifles are enough to fight a war ? no way
when you are faced with a mechanised column with 100+ troops in support with air support on stand by do you seriously think you stand any chance with a few rifles ? im sure you will kill a few . im sure youâre gonna come back and say how "yea buts its not conventional warfare " correct but at some point you must engage the enemy and win firefights . thats only done by achieving fire superiority .with a few rifles of which very few would be automatic you would find that quite hard .
i would put the effect of your struggle on the same scale as the IRA . enough to cause a headache but nothing more .
youâll be surprised how quickly people change their tune when the fear of losing loved ones sets in
no im not . however you will be fighting a conventional force who will have the kit of such a force which would be capable of dealing with insurgencies effectively .
modern warfare is generally fought around large population centres e.g cities hence my earlier example of Aleppo . you seem to have a view that an invading force would only retaliate to guerrilla warfare by using infantry . they wont .
they would use whats to their advantage . in such a case would be the ability to spot you before you spot them
example - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaufhZv84Gk
the russians would likely be doing a shit ton more of that than ISAF does/did
they would also use IFV, tanks , jets , ships , APCâs , drones and just about everything else in their arsenal . while you have a rifle .