Re: Re: Some Thoughts I Found Interesting on Guerrilla Warfare
 

I'm not following you. I'm confused.

What I was trying to get at was its not so much the guerrillas CHOOSING remote geography as it is remote geography being one of the root causes of conflict. It is often as difficult to transport solid national identity through jungle as it is to move more traditional commodities.

That is a VERY interesting statement. Makes good sense too, when you think about it. Kind of like Galapagos turtles . . .

You are right about the state presence in remote areas of course. However, when doing an area study for feasibility for a movement, that is but one of the considerations, albeit an important one. Movements do best on the fringe of the remote are, not deep into it. They need some state presence to use as targets in the early stages. The troops in these areas are not usually the best, nor are the commanders.

In LATAM, there has been far more changes of power through coups than G movements. Therefore the best troops are usually in or near the capital.

The fringes also offer the kind of support from the local populace needed.

Che for example went too deep in Bolivia.

If a guerrilla coulmn attacks a govt outpost where there is none, does it make a sound?

There is no movement if there is nothing to move against, so of course you will see more attacks on the fringe than deep in the jungle primeval. Suppose though, rather than slowly expanding the area of influence, troops just got dropped into a remote area that did not have any representation from the central government (positive or negative). That group might suffer the same number of attacks as those on the fringe.

All of this is assuming that the remote areas are populated. When I talk about remote, I'm talking about a geographic area that is populated, but has limited contact with the central government due to extreme geography.

The other consideration is recruiting. If there is little or no state presence, the locals won't have much to be pissed off about. Less likely to join the movement.

If the Gs have to move long distances to get to the edge of the state presence, they run an increased risk of detection.

Do we need to distinguish between separatists and non-separatists here?

I don't think so, the principles hold true.

JMO

JMO?

I believe that O'Neill mentions the PLFO in Oman having success because the population in the Khofar region (I think, don't have my copy) felt alienated from the government, partially because of their geographic seperation. This would seem to support Jimbo's hypothesis.

Solid

Just My Opinion

One case of 1,000. Remember what I told you about O'Neill

Thanks. I really have to get that Small Wars book and broaden my reading base.

Solid

The Walter Laquer book is the best to start with I think.

NDD- I have the available ones on order, but they are in short supply. Coincidentally, I recieved No End To War: Terrorism in the 21st century today, but I'd prefer to start with his classic pieces so I probably won't be reading that for a few more months assuming the other books arrive promptly.

Solid

On second thoughts, this is a long shot, but...

If any of you have any Laqueur books (Guerrilla and Guerrilla Reader come to mind) that you'd be willing to part with (for reimbursement), it'd be much appreciated.

Solid

Amazon