Is it possible to win a war in which the enemy strictly uses guerrilla tactics?

The coalition forces are facing this right now in Afghanistan. The Taliban (and all other Pashtuns that are joining the enemy effort) are using guerrilla tactics. They are not winning any battles but they are gambling that they will win the war by breaking the will of their opponents. Is there any way to defeat an enemy who uses guerrilla tactics and is willing to blow themselves up for their cause?|||You cant win a war against an enemy doesn't fight for a flag. You can kill many of them and you can slow their fight but you wont "win". You wont break the will of someone fighting for a god either. There is no convincing or changing there mind.

How many americans are against the war in iraq?

I'm not american, but I will like to read about your comments on the war at this time.


Thank you.|||Of course, you have posed a good question, I believe it is around 60% Had our Intel guys got it right - they did not -- we had considerable support for the war at that time when the Twin Towers were blown down by Right Wing Muslims, their theocrats.





Had the war ended when our soldiers reached Bahgdad Bush would have been a hero. We won the war as Americans at that time, however, Iraqi's as a whole did not want it that way. The Sunni's wanted the status quo and the Shiia now could finally move in and wipe out the hated Sunni.





In fact we only opened Pandora's Box and played into the hands of Ahmadinijhad. The lack of understanding of what made Iraq is unforgiveable, the history and information was available on Google. No one did their homework, they ASSUMED all Iraq would rush out and throw flowers at us not IED's. I, as an American and, have worked in Iraq feel so bad about this situation you have no idea. To keep on sying we are going to set them up to take care of themselves is also nonsense, we can't do that, The Shiia are now free to massacre and take over the country for Greater Persia and we did it. As a last resort all we should do now is protect the Kurds in the north -- I give up frustrated beyond belief!|||2|||Ten thousand, nine hunded, and seventy-two.|||nobody wants a war, nobody is " for" war, but its something that has to be done............Semper Fi...http://360.yahoo.com/lavadogmarineone|||All but the 28% still brainwashed.|||Depends on how you ask the question in the poll, When asked simply if we are against the war...75 %.. when asked if you would support the war for a positive outcome..20%|||If the polls are right 74%. What we need is to bring in Iran a Shiite nation and Saudi Arabia a Summi nation replace our troops.|||Not i its part of the over all war on world terror.|||According to yesterday's NBC Poll... over 75 PERCENT of Americans are against the war|||clearly not enough to do anything to stop it|||Less than people think .People to often listen to the liberal media which changes their thought because of their bias.


I have a cousin out in Iraq that really knows whats going on, not all the stuff that the media portrays.|||I'm against it. I didn't mind going in and kicking *** but I didn't want our troops to be bogged in there for so long..as soon as we captured Sadam we should of left that country.


We should go in and kick *** to whatever country that supports terrorist but not stay..


If other countries don't like it tuff.. If UN don't like it tuff. That'll teach other country who even thinks about harboring terrorist.|||A lot more than exposed.


I'm also against this war, but I've never been counted because I've never been asked.|||Less than you wish.





Mark me as one vote YES.





Fought those people all through Desert Storm and until the day I retired. Finish that mess or keep going. Backing off wiill cause Europe and USA nothing but catastrophe.





Ret USAF SNCO|||Only thoughs that think Iraq still have WMDs|||I'm not against the war in Iraq so much as I am against the way it is being fought.





There are things that are worth fighting for, but in Iraq, the goals are not at all clear and the justification for the war in the first place is flawed.





On the other hand, we made the mess, we ought to clean it up and not just walk away. But no one seems to have a way to do that. It is terribly frustrating.|||Many Americans are against the war, but its the big picture that is the concern. America went over initially due to the attack on the American soil, and to attempt to take out the Taliban training camps and so on and so forth, only to find that they are bigger than ever expected. America is now over there for a few reasons, one to assist in rebuild of democracy, two to ensure that the SOB's don't follow us the minute we pull out and seeing as weak. I am sure there are several other reasons and some reasons that are for political gain alone. So yes many Americans to include us troops are against the war.|||nobody is "for" war of any kind but we have to finish the job. if we pull out now no one would ever fear the USA again so we would be vulnerable to more attacks.|||I am very against this war. And from all the political polls I've read, the majority of america is starting to feel the same way.|||I am against this war but I am FOR our troops. I think that we went into that country under false pretenses and over 3500 of our brave men and women has given their lives for a lie. It's definitely time for them to come home!! God Bless our TROOPS!|||I'm not against the war. What I am against though, is the way we are fighting this war. The rules of engagements must be removed on our armed forces. If the rules of engagements had been removed, this war would've been fought a lot quicker. And more Americans would've supported it too. All the bloodshed going on now in Iraq, is a result of the rules of engagement. We (U.S.A.)must use extreme force. That includes bombing mosques too. Which is where the terrorists hide.|||the majority

What would happen if a nuclear war start?

If there's an outburst in Iran?





North Korea send the Nukes on Japan and South Korea,





The US retaliates , China and Russia enter the nuke game





India and Pakistan start fighting





Things got worst in Iraq and Afghanistan





UEA, Palestine, Jordan and Egypt jump on Israel,





a tsunami happen in the Caribbean


and everyone start fighting .





Would this mean that the end of the world would be near?





If all the nuke countries started a nuclear war, what would happen to the rest of survivors if there is any?|||Total disaster. The rest of the survivors would be a very small amount. In a nuclear war, mass fatalities is imminent, survival is futile. The global disaster would destroy all plant life and cause more damage to the ozone layer, allowing in more of radiation. The survivors nearly about 40-50ft of ground zero where the bomb would drop would probably have at least 15 seconds until the 4,000 degree heat wave would reach and at least 30 until the shock wave does.





But it's not mainly the initial blast that kills people, but the mass radiation. Gamma rays ( deadliest form of radiation) can penetrate body tissue and flesh damaging vital organs and causing cancer. Radiation sickness would spread all over even though it's not contagious. A lot of the earth by the first week of a nuclear war would already be contaminated and a fall out is still out of the question, living underground. Any food left around with opened containers would be contaminated, animals would be too contaminated to eat and life would be unbearable for people to sustain.





It could mark the end of the world as you say. Radiation contamination can spread all over the world, infecting everyone. Maybe within the first 3 weeks or so, survivors would survive but a nuclear war can only last so long. Maybe there's hope? Maybe not. Right now, the world has more than 30x times the nuclear weapons to kill off the human race so it's not so good if a nuclear war starts. Lets hope in our life time, one won't start. But with Iran and North Korea posing a threat, were never safe. A nuclear war does not seem probable at the time but yet, a nuclear war can come at any time with no warning.





Heck, at defcon 1, the U.S. military can be kicking, firing all the nukes they can blast within the first 15 minutes that defcon 1 is issued. Lets just hope your not in the area of ground zero. If your on the other side of the globe, you're probably ok.|||Well pretty much if there were survivers, they would be living in the dark ages. Pretty much starting all over from scratch. They'd have to try and survive and move to areas that wouldn't be contaminated. How they'd find those areas, most probably wouldn't be able to. There would be a lot of fatalities from radiation sickness and cancer. Life may go on, but who knows if the radiation would alter our DNA somehow.|||alot of things would happpen...u would have global warming..and that willl mess with the ozone layer....air willl be polluted.....plants would stop growing..animals would die because lack of food...and then we would proably die..|||youd die *****

How to stop golden retriever from playing tugo of war when is supposed to be fetching?

My golden retriever is pretty good at retrieving objects when thrown or asked to fetch. However, since she used to play tugo of war when she was younger, whenever she retrieves, she starts tugging on the object, especting to play tug of war. How do I stop this?|||Teach her the drop it/leave it command. When she brings back the object she retrieved, have her drop it and leave it so you can throw it again. Using training treats for this makes it rather easy to do. Once she brings you back the object have a treat ready and say drop it, give her the treat, if she goes to pick it up have another treat and say leave it, give the treat and pick up the toy. Doesn't take too long until they bring it back, drop it and wait for you to throw it again.|||Tug of war has become a game to her. You need to stop making it fun. If she if fetching well, when she brings the toy back, give her a command as you try to take the toy (something like "give" or "drop"). Of course, she won't do it the first couple times, she'll try to tug. At that point let go of the toy and turn your back, crossing your hands in front of you. She'll probably bring the toy to your front because she wants to tug. Reach down for it again, giving the command and every time she pulls, turn your back. This will take awhile, but at some point she will give it to you rather than pulling - if for no other reason she's trying to figure out how to please you. When that happens, FIRST AND FOREMOST TAKE THE TOY!!!! Then LAVISH her with praise and give her a treat.





Repeat.





Many many times.





And most importantly, use the command each time. Also be careful not to OVER use the command. If she doesn't do what you want after you say it once or twice tops, turn your back. Otherwise all she's going to be hearing is "Beuller... Beuller... Beuller..."|||Hi,


It takes work,..some ideas,..when she wont give it to you , you could ignor her,..when she gives it to you,..them play,..if she is like my dog,..she wants to play more,..another thing I did,..(always asking the dog to release as he gave it to me ) was though a ball,..have him bring it back, then through another,..he would drop the one ball, then go get the other,..when he dropped the one,..I reinforced, release,..One of the best things though if the dog just wont release, is believe it or not,..blow in his ear,..Trust me,..he will release,..LOL,..but they are the steps I used with my dog,..it took some time but no he sometimes wants to tug, and I ignore him,..so he drops the toy,..he knows I am serious,..but the blowing in the ear works instantly,..if you practice these enough,..your dog will get the idea!|||I dont know maybe she likes playing tugo of war better:)

What is the name of the war movie which follows a battalion of african americans soldiers?

I remember seeing a movie about this, I believe it was a movie that takes place in WWI, or maybe a earlier war. I believe the movie was made around the mid 70's and up. I can't remember none of the actors names either.|||There was glory but that's the civil war with denzel Washington and Matthew Broderick|||You are probably asking about the WW11 movie directed by Spike Lee called the Miracle at St. Anna. Please click on the link below for my full review of this very good film.





http://www.tvmoviequotes.com/fatwayne/mi鈥?/a>





Hope this helps you.

What strategy did the American military adopt from the French and Indian War?

The French and Indian War, a worl war that was fought primarily ont he soil of American colonies, broght about the development of American military strategy known as WHAT? This would be later utilized int eh American Revolutionary War.|||Hit and run. Later, this would be called 'guerrilla' (little war) tactics. Sun Tzu wrote about it loooong before Indians and Americans used it!|||Well technically, the French and Indian War was part of the larger-scale Seven Years War between Britain and France and involving their colonies in North American as well as a number of Native American tribes. So it was not an ‘American’ war per se. That being said, I think the defining tactic that the American colonists introduced was the use of militia as a major component of their fighting force. Colonists living on the frontier fought alongside regular British Army units against the French. George Washington was an American Colonial commissioned in the British Army during this war. The use of irregular tactics was not unique, but the use of a “citizen army” of part-time volunteers, which would later enter American historical lore as “Minutemen” during the Revolution was.

What is some interesting connected information between the civil war, and today's presidential election?

I'm writing a journalism style news story on the civil war, and I need some connecting information or facts on the civil war and today's presidential election. Please help me!|||Connecting information, blacks %26amp; whites still disagree with one another, white people continue to view skin color, while black people are still fighting for equality.