Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (93342)	4/14/2003 10:16:14 AM
From: Sun Tzu	Respond to of 281500

Amazingly very little has changed in the essence of military campaigns. Take the issue of Flag capturing for example. Today it is a matter of military tradition and "honor" not to loose a flag (or for the other side to capture one). But in the old days it was a very real and practical necessity. In the absence of radio, flags were used as a means of order troops around coordinating action. If you'd captured the enemy flags, their general would be unable to order his troops and you'd have a great advantage over them. So you see, not much has changed in waging war; destroy your enemy's communication network and you can roast them. Nations who have survived, are those who learned how to counter such measures. The Parthian for example would entice great armies of their enemies to come into their lands so that they could wage guerrilla warfare from a vantage point. Gandhi found a very different solution which combined with efforts of others, proved successful. IRA discovered the opposite of Gandhian methods can work too if you provide a "political" wing to go with it. As to the disparity of arms, a crude atomic bomb that uses 60 year old technology is just as scary as a big modern one. Only an idiot will think he can indefinitely withhold such weapons from others. I know of no precedence for weapons not migrating down the food chain.