How well would an untrained rebel do in battle?

File: 1473801632615.png (203KB, 1802x905px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1802x905px

There realistically wouldn't be much infantry to fight since most would desert, but for the sake of argument it would be like Vietnam if our hands were tied even more. The government would have to fight very, very humanely to avoid giving any foreign powers an excuse to intervene. Almost all fighting would take place in the form of hit-and-run "battles" where even if there were infantry willing to fight they would be caught off guard and perform poorly as a result.

>>31370683
Depends on the type of environment the firefight takes place in.

>>31370683
Define "untrained". If you're talking about someone who knows how to shoot but has no military knowledge then situationally they could probably do well enough but if you're talking about someone who doesn't know anything about guns beyond what they've seen in action movies then they'd almost certainly be ded. If you're talking about wanna-be oper8tors who jerk off to First Blood, own a curated collection of FMs and TMs and have been training for SHTF/RaHoWa/etc. for years, they'd probably aquit themselves admirably.

>>31371146
What I mean by untrained is someone who has been to the range and is an good shooter, but has no military experience. They've only shot at paper targets, they don't know how to make homemade bombs, and they don't know military jargon and tactics.

>>31370683
I don't think the rebel would ever want to be in a "battle". They'd probably just want to attack a small patrol, some guards, or just soldiers standing around in general and then run.

In a hypothetical battle I think it would be even. You have these richfag preppers with their plate carriers and AR-15s and shit, then you have poorfags with slavshit. They're going up against regular army or national guard who are probably reluctant to kill their own and probably have never seen combat themselves. Especially combat where your hands are very tied.

If the soldiers all die or take (heavy) casualties, the rebels win. If the rebels all die or civillians get hit the rebels win because now you have news of american troops gunning down unarmed gud bois

>>31371304
Implying either bomb making or military jargon are difficult by any means to figure out.

>>31371393
It depends on what measures the government is taking. Sure I can look up how to make a bomb on google in five seconds and get the supplies fairly easily, but if the government is tracking internet searches and tapping phones then actually figuring out how to do it is enough to get the government suspicious of you.

>>31371304
In that case, assuming that they have a crash course in small unit tactics I think that they'd do pretty well on familiar ground - particularly on defense. Without the crash course, they'd probably be ded unless they were just doing a shoot-and-scoot.

>>31370683
not well

there is a lot more to war than knowing how to use a weapon

could they set up secure supply chains, or would they run out of supplies/?

would they stay in cohesive units, or turn on each other when they disagreed, refused to follow orders or fight for command?

would they pick good fighting positions, or would they constantly be drawn into ambushes and outmaneuvered?

could they afford to fight across seasons and look after their families, or would they run out of money and be called home?

American militia would do about as well as Mexican militia, African militia, Afghan militia

>>31372038
Pentagon estimates like a 3/4 desertion rate, and if the public is as good as the afghan militia that means the army gets btfo and gives up.

Well if you want a related example the IRA got shot to shit every time they tired to engage the British in a firefirght, they used bombs or small arms ambushes; and often the British would turn those ambushes around and kill them anyway.

Untrained irregulars vs trained profession soldiers has always been a risky gamble for the irregulars. They need things like tactical surprise or greatly superior numbers to increase their odds to a point where they are reasonable.

File: image.jpg (2MB, 3500x2318px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3500x2318px

Just ask the miners and tractor drivers from Donbass who successfully rose up against the facist Kiev junta, and won

File: image.jpg (2MB, 3500x2302px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3500x2302px

>>31372289

>>31372093
the afgani's didn't win, contrary to popular belief

they sustained enormous losses, got their hometowns leveled by airstrikes, and took massive casualties

but it's not really the same
the afgans were up against invading forces, without established bases and unaccustomed to the terrain

for instance many areas in afganistan could feed themselves

>>31370683
Talking out my ass, but wouldn't a lot of it depend on what countries/factions decide to financially support the rebels? And how good the incumbent regime is at keeping money/supplies from reaching said rebels

>>31372350
>>31372350
So the us will conduct air strikes on Dallas, Phoenix or whatever city if it has a rebel element in it then? You aren't really thinking this through

>>31370683
He does well enough as a distraction while the real shooters are hitting truck drivers, patrols, etc from a couple hundred yards with bolt rifles.

>>31370790
>would desert
Stop it. They wouldn't.

>>31372438
not that anon but the only ones that would stay would be the one that are statist

>infantry

Try police. Tyranny is reinforced by law

Laws are enforced by law enforcement. They won't risk negative pr on using the military when the police already willingly do it for a solid paycheck and benefits plus the added benefit of conservative cucks daring not to cross the blue line

>>31370683
What that other anon said.

Oh, I'm sure the untrained minuteman could hold his own as a rebel just fine; but it's that unit cohesion and political homogeneity that truly matters int he case of a rebellion.

What happens when the United Peoples gather together to fight under one cause? They might win, or they might lose; but either way, it is guaranteed they will fight quite admirably.

But what happens when Lieutenant Preston and Rebel Heston both start to rethink Commandant Tristan's policies? What if they think he's too lenient? What if they think he's too fair? What is, God forbid, they think he's just not cruel enough?

And when Rebel Heston gets tired of following around his new commander? Won't he want to raise an army of his own and take control? And what if one of his cohorts begins to question his methods as well?

See, raising an army is easy. Keeping it is not. That's why when people say they value "good leadership", they really do mean it when they say they value GOOD leadership.

Cut off the head, and a new one may take its place; but what you find to replace that gaping hole may not be the once charismatic leader you said you'd live and die for.

In other words; you want to stop a rebellion? All you need is 30 pieces of gold and silver.

A bit like how well do criminals do against a trained police force? Not to well on average - may get away with first strikes and random shit, but once the force has gathered info, identified targets and prepped it's better equipped army, it's usually game over for the individuals. Depends a lot on the info gathered though and their level of intervention, which can then have a detrimental effect on how the locals view them in the future, effecting future rebel recruitment, info gathering and access to the area.

>>31372382
that's not what I'm saying, my point is that partican forces always suffer disproportionate loses, and bring more casualties on the civilian population

a millitia could repulse police, but they couldn't stop a tank no matter how many of them there were

they couldn't assault outposts set up to stop traffic

look what happened when a millitia took that wildlife reserve
the fed just waited till they ran out of food and got bored, then picked them up one by one on their way home

>>31372528
That's what they did wrong

They should have left the building alone and ambushed police forces in the town when theyre out running radar

>>31371304
>not mentioning field skills even once

File: Ukrainian rebels.jpg (142KB, 700x400px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 700x400px

>>31370683
>How well would an untrained rebel do in battle?
Look up videos of fighting in Ukraine and Syria.
>Getting into each other's firing lanes.
>Lack of any ability to maneuver competently in the battlefield.
>Shitty fire discipline: Blind firing. Giving away one's position by firing too early.
>Breaks up easily.
>Oogabooga tier tit-for-tat fighting similar to ghetto gang """""""warfare"""""""".
>Breathtaking casualties.
Shitshows basically.

>>31372289
Ukraine has compulsory military service, just like the Soviet Union and just like most other Soviet states, so it's possible that a miner or a tractor driver has actually served in the Ukrainian military.

>>31370683
Well civilians have access to better and mor3 powerful rifles
And also remember that infantry train their marksmanship at 300m

The US for btfo out of Afghanistan so I'd imagine it would be even worse since most right wing people can sustain themselves in rural areas and because of the things >>31370790 said

>>31372289

Except the separatists did not - little tidbit provided by military officer that serves as OSCE observer in Ukraine:

With-in two weeks of the whole thing starting separatists proved to be have combat units which had clearly unit cohesion and capability of unit level tactics that can only be reached after several months of training as an existing military unit.

Use your brains...

>>31372728
Ukraine civilians are more discipline then the syrian ragheads even when the CIA trained those dumbasses

>>31371304

it would be a lot better for you to not contemplate such scenarios. you or your team won't do anything but piss off a platoon or company sized force and be put into an early grave. stay on cod.

>>31370790
>The government would have to fight very, very humanely to avoid giving any foreign powers an excuse to intervene.
>implying that the US isn't the only country who gives a shit about other countries

Ha ha ha. Tell me, do you really see the UK coming in to stop the US from slaughtering its own citizens?

>>31374483
That's not the issue.

Russia could take it as a good opportunity to try and invade/occupy US soil. You missed the real risk entirely by thinking UK would/could do much of anything besides provide small ammounts of force.

The idea of killing redcoats on US soil again excites me... I almost hope they would help our corrupt government that we'd be fighting against.

>>31371473
Y'all shouldn't even have to google that.

Just pick/make your material and go old-school.

>>31370790

Thats bs, first of all there will never ever be a "general uprising" the "people" would never do that, it will always be a minority, just like the American Revolution and any other revolution. The few that would, would be called terrorists or traitors and nobody would desert. If you actually think a "popular" uprising has ever happened you are wrong. Just look at the US today, batshit crazy liberals are running the place, very few people would support what the media would call a "right wing terrorist group". Most people are to docile to start a fight.

>>31372438
army NCO here. id desert and leave the locks to every supply cage unlocked

>mfw C&C generals angry mobs on the way

File: 1424082584464.png (165KB, 544x304px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 544x304px

>>31377610
my face got deleted by the government

File: 10616021_542578365873622_5161199273579434970_n.jpg (80KB, 720x546px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 720x546px

>>31372117
>Untrained irregulars vs trained profession soldiers has always been a risky gamble for the irregulars. They need things like tactical surprise or greatly superior numbers to increase their odds to a point where they are reasonable.

What they mostly need is information, example, im from Macedonia and in 2001 we had a war with Albanian insurgents. Now this wasn't "untrained irregulars" vs "trained professional soldiers" because most of the Macedonian army was made of conscripts and most of the fighting was done by the police, and the irregulars were veterans of the Kosovo war, augmented with local volunteers. The NLA insurgents managed to inflict casualties mostly by information leaked from within our army, they managed to get a hold of information about unarmored convoys with reservists going to the front and would ambush them with rpg's or set up mines. It is a known fact they were trained and supported by the west, the battle of Aracinovo is a clear example of this. In the entire conflict the Macedonian army's hands were tied, allowed only to "return appropriate fire" which meant no heavy artillery what so ever, and only shoot when shot at, the NLA would agree to a ceasefire and then violate it a hundred times. They lost in the field but because of foreign support and information they managed to get a peace treaty and amnesty. Now vid related is what happened only 6 years later, when a rogue irregular unit of Albanian insurgents met with a professional force.

The video is graphic, skip to 1:51 for the aftermath footage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_t3qOh03-X8

>>31377610
E4, Seconded.

File: 1472760565589.jpg (54KB, 402x384px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 402x384px

>>31370790
>since most would desert