Canadian Millitia/Insurgent tactics?

[a_majoor]

First, I asked myself what would be different if we went into Afghanistan where the population was somewhat educated, and had access to similar resources as I did here in Canada. We were up against people using asymmetrical warfare tactics using dominantly the most primitive forms of weapons with decent success.

I looked at the resources available to myself in my home. Looking at the computers/electronics around my home, the supplies/chemicals/cleaning supplies in my house. Chemicals/supplies available in home depot etc. I realized what a different enemy would would have been facing if they had access to the same stuff I do....especially the off-the-shelf potassium based acids used for metal cleaning. Mercy!

If they were not so basic and primitive, the situation would have been very different. I can't guess to how much more successful they would have been, but we likely would have had a much harder war.

Second, technology has changed enough that I think the type of weapons and tactics that could be created are going to have a major impact on how North Americans would fight an occupational force.

Third, if we know what a high-tech, educated, resourceful insurgent really looks like and is capable of doing, then we can anticipate and create counter-tactics/tech. If we happen to go into a country that is a lot smarter and capable then we are not caught with out pants down.



If it became a good document, then parts could be kept close to the chest of someone official and made available when need be. I'm likely going to be working with the military and strategic studies department at the UofC if this project actually moves forward.
The question is whether we should all get the high school jackets, or not?

I'm talking about creating a potentially useful document here, not forming a group or anything.

One interesting thing about the evolution of 4GW and related tools (i.e. using fairly sophisticated devices made from cheaply available materials in your house) is it replicated the "Infantry Revolution" of the late 1400's, where developments like crossbows, pike squares and revised tactics mean that large numbers of people with minimal training could become effective on the battlefield against the highly trained and expensively equipped knights and other men at arms (such as English longbowmen or Ottoman Jannissaries with compound bows) who needed a lifetime of training to be effective.

The cost ratio between an IED team making a weapon out of a pressure cooker vs the LAV III destroyed and the crew killed is very much in favour of the IED team in terms of the resources needed.

 

[Journeyman]

I'm likely going to be working with the military and strategic studies department at the UofC if this project actually moves forward.

Ah well, you giddy up then.

 

[Pieman]

The cost ratio between an IED team making a weapon out of a pressure cooker vs the LAV III destroyed and the crew killed is very much in favour of the IED team in terms of the resources needed.

Very much so. I wonder what they would have needed to get a better foot hold up against such a drastic difference between resources and technology. Hit and run is basically all they were doing...mind you in '09 they were saving up their resources for the election and disruption of the voting process. It was like a years worth of activities in the span of two days.

Ah well, you giddy up then.

I do intend to incorporate ideas from the community here at some point. So will post again when I have a more concrete path forward.