Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!henry From: henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) Newsgroups: can.politics Subject: Re: Make the rich pay? - no, the middle class, as usual. Message-ID: <7443@utzoo.UUCP> Date: Sat, 20-Dec-86 23:02:40 EST Article-I.D.: utzoo.7443 Posted: Sat Dec 20 23:02:40 1986 Date-Received: Sat, 20-Dec-86 23:02:40 EST References: <2819@watdcsu.UUCP> Organization: U of Toronto Zoology Lines: 47 > ... I seriously doubt that they > could occupy North America, in view of the trouble they have with a > mickey-mouse country like Afghanistan, which is much closer and doesn't > involve crossing any oceans. I don't think a large standing army is > needed, just a populace that is willing to put up a fight. Afghanistan is hardly a mickey-mouse country, given the temperament of the inhabitants. And while Afghanistan is certainly giving the Soviets a lot of trouble, it's worth noting that the Afghans are suffering pretty severely for it. It's not clear to me that North Americans love their freedom and democracy, as opposed to safety and prosperity, enough to live with the sort of crackdowns and punitive measures the Soviets are freely applying in Afghanistan. The Afghans have Islam to hold them together against the invaders; I see no North American equivalent. Especially given that the Afghans have been fighting invaders for centuries, while North America has been quiet and peaceful internally. (The question is not whether some North Americans would be angry enough to fight, but whether the non-fighting North Americans would show enough solidarity to support the fighters even when the occupation forces started getting nasty. Guerillas and such have little chance of long-term survival and effectiveness unless the non-fighting population supports them.) Also, willingness to put up a fight doesn't count for as much as you'd think against modern weapons. The Afghan guerillas would undoubtedly give several semi-essential parts of their anatomies in exchange for man-portable anti- aircraft missiles; they have said so (phrased a bit differently...). They are badly short of many things. This, in a country with (a) a history of internal warfare, (b) a history of armed resistance to invasion, (c) an active cottage industry in arms, and (d) a history of vigorous smuggling across the border from a friendly neighbor. Even if North Americans have the will to make trouble for an invader, they are sadly ill-equipped to do so, even by Afghan standards. (Before you start counting hunting rifles, remember to count ammunition for them as well. 50 rounds is several years' supply for a moderately active big-game hunter, but is NOTHING for combat, even guerilla warfare. Guns without ammunition are useless.) Switzerland is a better model than Afghanistan. The Swiss do have standing armed forces, although of relatively modest size. More important, nearly the entire population is TRAINED and EQUIPPED to fight as militia. They know that enthusiasm isn't enough, even with natural advantages like their ideal defensive terrain. -- Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology {allegra,ihnp4,decvax,pyramid}!utzoo!henry