If you were in charge of waging a war against guerrillas

Oct 2013
14,412
Europix
#91
Yes but the allies and germans had very different goals in mind.
The germans wanted to conquer and drive out/kill/create a lower class of non germans in the countries they conquered for settlement by germans later.
Ofcourse.

But it doesn't change in terms of reaction: their ruthless didn't weakened the guerillas.

Not that much different (as principle) from the post-WWII western guerillas (Red Brigades, RAF, and the likes): the reforms and evolutions in the working class status cut them from their natural suport, or base if You prefer, so the "Hydra phenomenon" stoped existing. Thus easier to fight them and eventualy eliminate them.
 

martin76

Ad Honorem
Dec 2014
6,468
Spain
#92
Yes but the allies and germans had very different goals in mind.
The germans wanted to conquer and drive out/kill/create a lower class of non germans in the countries they conquered for settlement by germans later.
But the fact was the "ruthless" didn´t work in Russia or Yugoslavia (or Greece)...
 
Oct 2015
5,222
Matosinhos Portugal
#93
I think the Americans tried that in Vietnam. It didn't work very well.

Portuguese Vietnam worked almost 14 years . To win a guerrilla war is difficult.It cost a lot to Portugal




Guiné - Madina do Boé CCaç1790.mpg

Portuguese military were attacked 243 times
video only in portuguese, I could not have video in english version my apologies
 
May 2011
13,934
Navan, Ireland
#95
It all really depends upon the 'context' of the period you are talking about so for instance in Ireland in 1920 the RIC and Auxiliaries could be 'harsh' but by going beyond the law they may have badly hurt the 'IRA' but it was counterproductive since it created 'martyrs' and crucially did not look good in the British papers and ultimately that's the most important place.

What might work in the wide open spaces of Russia would not work in densely populated Western Europe.
 
Jun 2013
493
Connecticut
#96
Destroy their supply line immediately. By supplies I mean everything from food to shoes. If you fail to do this then you've lost.It's logistics that determine the course of the war. The mundane, regimented idea of logistics first and foremost.
 
Oct 2013
14,412
Europix
#97
It all really depends upon the 'context' of the period you are talking about so for instance in Ireland in 1920 the RIC and Auxiliaries could be 'harsh' but by going beyond the law they may have badly hurt the 'IRA' but it was counterproductive since it created 'martyrs' and crucially did not look good in the British papers and ultimately that's the most important place.

What might work in the wide open spaces of Russia would not work in densely populated Western Europe.
I don't think open or closed spaces change that much: people "tick" the same way everywhere. As indiscriminate harshness created "martyrs" amongst Irish, the same martyrs were created in URSS, or elsewhere.
 
Oct 2013
14,412
Europix
#98
What do you mean with didnt work?
Does effectivly fighting guerillas mean 0% guerilla attacks?
The question is how much guerilla were suppresed or not.
Well, Yougoslav partisans were already some 200,000 in 1942, and more than 400,000 in the late 1944.

Polish partisans were some 600,000 in late 1944.

Both countries being occupied since the beginning of the war.

Soviets did managed to eliminate the Polish home army, unlike Germans. But Soviets didn't treated civil population as the Germans did, and their general approach was different.
 

stevev

Ad Honorem
Apr 2017
3,309
Las Vegas, NV USA
#99
Me too.

Ruthless/disregard/indifference towards civilian occupied population is counterproductive, when not dangerous. It slaps back.

One have to deal not only with the warriors but with their base too. And guerillas base (and one of their strong points) is the popular support.

Fighting directly guerillas without in parallel working on depriving them of the popular support becomes costly, lengthy.

WWII Germany's exemplary public executions didn't stopped partisans. I have the impression it had the contrary effect.
This is why I said to be ruthless with the guerrillas and their supporters to the extent they can be identified and engaged. This is not easy but the rest of the population of a conquered country must understand they must submit or face dire consequences. Submission should tolerable so as not to expand the guerrilla base of support. If the base is too large then you might need to pull a "Madero" or get out.:eek:
 
Oct 2013
14,412
Europix
This is why I said to be ruthless with the guerrillas and their supporters to the extent they can be identified and engaged. This is not easy but the rest of the population of a conquered country must understand they must submit or face dire consequences. Submission should tolerable so as not to expand the guerrilla base of support. If the base is too large then you might need to pull a "Madero" or get out.:eek:
If You occupy a place and want to keep it on long term/indefinitely/for ever, making population to accept submission means You're already close to failing, if not already starting failing.