You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] whitedogofpyr ago 

Look at crimea for an example. Every road was barricaded. The ethnic russians created smaller communities that supported each other and Ukraine couldn't really do much. In the US, you'd have the same dynamic. Getting out to remove barricades would create numerous ambush opportunities for the few that decided to directly confront the feds. It would become a necessity considering the massive amounts of people fleeing cities for food. Once you start the snowball, if it's not crushed and propagandized immediately, you'd get your conventional army sized group, they just wouldn't fight a conventional war, nor would most of them actually want to fight a war.

That's just roads. Gas, water, and power lines should all be considered as well. A very small, smart group could do a lot of damage in a short period of time. The rest is just natural progression. Then it's just a matter of what comes after because then you get a Napoleon, a Washington, or a Stalin... aka rolling the dice is more dangerous than reform, so people would have to have nothing left to lose.

Let me know what you think because this stuff is fun to think about and I may be missing something.

0
0

[–] Broc_Lia ago 

I still think roadblocks is a non-starter because there's simply too many roads. Random mines and IEDs would be useful in terms of attrition, but not a game changer.

Better targets might be highly centralised systems, like power generation and water treatment. Even knocking down a few critical transformers would do a hell of a lot of damage. Other than property damage the impact would be similar to an earthquake or a hurricane. It would also affect food supplies as perishables would go off, people wouldn't be able to cook without water and those without fossil fuel stoves wouldn't be able to heat their food.

Agreed it's a risk in terms of what would come after, but it's a risk to allow an existing system to stand too.