Can an armed yeomanry resist a professional army?

[ink]

That was actualy Army vs Teritorial Defence & Special purpose (anti-terorist) police units.

That is more in line of eg. US Army vs National Guard & local SWAT teams.

 

But with a whole host of other problems thrown in. For example, JNA officers who were Croatian or sympathetic to their causechanging sides or allowing the enemy's troops into weapons depots or similar.

 

Also worth mentioning is that the JNA was a conscript army, not a trully professional army in the modern sense.

[SCFalken]

Bumped, due to companion topic "Sport Shooters, etc"...

 

 

 

Falken

[Murph]

Texas vs Mexico.

[Sardaukar]

I think that when country has to use their military against own population, there are bigger problems than "can they beat them or not"....

[X-Files]

Sorry, it is too much of a fantasy story to think of en exterior power trying to conquer and control the US.

 

"You cannot invade the United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass." - Admiral Yamamoto

 

The only even remotely possible scenario for some kind of war in the US is a civil war of some sort.

 

<shrug> Here's a what-if? :

 

October 2009 - KATRINA 2 hits the SE US, 25% of the continental US is devastated. The Queen for Life invites a 'temporary force' of United Nations Peacekeeping Troops to help local authorities regain control of six major urban areas.

 

Precedence are the P3 missions flown off the US' East Coast after 9-11

 

Bubba don't like blue helmets.

Edited October 23, 2007 by X-Files

[Hittite Under The Bridge]

The size of the US Army is the smallest problem.

 

The size of the U.S. Military is indeed, the smallest problem. The capability of the U.S. Military is another thing altogether.

[SCFalken]

Wasn't the postwar Danish Home Guard constructed (secondarily) as a check on the national government (to prevent coups and unconstitutional actions)? IIRC, the local Company COs were given the authority to mobilize their troops at the first sign of enemy action, to include political "irregularities" (IOW, communist coups).

 

 

Falken

Edited October 24, 2007 by SCFalken

[Arthur Hubers]

Precedence are the P3 missions flown off the US' East Coast after 9-11

 

Bubba don't like blue helmets.

Those were E-3s, and those were NATO.

[Rocky Davis]

Bubba don't like blue helmets.

 

Neither do I . . . and this is supposedly "United Nations Day."

 

Just thinking about it's original intent and seeing how it is now pisses me off.

 

I think about it's original intent and then remember all of its foul-ups over the years and how it has gotten to be a den of opposing political factions where petty politics plays into nearly every decision rather than the "It's all for one and one for all!" deal it was supposed to have been.

 

F**k the UN.

[Soren Ras]

Wasn't the postwar Danish Home Guard constructed (secondarily) as a check on the national government (to prevent coups and unconstitutional actions)? IIRC, the local Company COs were given the authority to mobilize their troops at the first sign of enemy action, to include political "irregularities" (IOW, communist coups).

Falken

 

 

The experience of the government in April 1940 capitulating almost immediately (after waiting for the military to incur some token casualties) was no doubt part of the reason for the post-war creation of the Home Guard.

 

In 1952, The King signed a special order, the "Contingency Order" (Forholdsordre in Danish), stating that any enemy action against Danish territory or the Danish constitutional authorities (such as a Coup) was to be automatically considered as equivalent to a general mobilization order, and that all units (including the HG) were to immediately resist and combat the enemy. Additionally, all orders to cease fire or demobilize were to be ignored until sufficient verification that the order came from a lawful authority had been obtained (and that same authority had not been influenced or taken over by the enemy). It was specifically stated in the text that fifth column misinformation and false orders were to be expected, and that any order that would delay or reduce resistance should be considered unlawful, until properly verified.

 

In actuality, this really meant that in case of war, only the orders of the military command would be followed by military units, not any broadcast messages of the civilian government. Local commanders (initially defines at battalion CO equivalent and higher) were given entirely free hands to bring their units to full strength immediately and commence resistance and counterattacks. This was amended in 1961 to include all commanders, thus including Company COs in the HG.

 

 

--

Soren

[FlyingCanOpener]

I dunno about the NG, but reliable sources have informed me that USMC LAV's and helos deployed to South Central LA during the riots were loaded with 25mm and .50 cal, respectively, though they apparently didn't fire it.

 

Louisiana NG units are still armed in the Quagmire that is New Orleans.