who the hell has AT4?
Nobody currently, but in a conflict it's well-known that "little arms lead to bigger arms", and very quickly.
In the 1980s Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, for example, a Mujahideen fighter with just an AK-47 (or even just a pistol!) could shoot a Russian soldier who was carrying an RPG and his buddy who had a big case full of RPG rounds, and now guess what? The Mujahideen dude has an RPG and a shitload of warheads for it.
Don't fall for simplistic, incorrect "static model" thinking where you think one level deep and then stop (e.g. "the populace only has small arms, the military has bigger arms"). At the very start of a conflict, sure, but that rapidly becomes very untrue because the real world operates on the "dynamic model".
who the hell has AT4?
Nobody currently, but in a conflict it's well-known that "little arms lead to bigger arms", and very quickly.
In the 1980s Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, for example, a Mujahideen fighter with just an AK-47 (or even just a pistol!) could shoot a Russian soldier who was carrying an RPG and his buddy who had a big case full of RPG rounds, and now guess what? The Mujahideen dude has an RPG and a shitload of warheads for it.
Don't fall for simplistic, incorrect "static model" thinking where you think one level deep and then stop (e.g. "the populace only has small arms, the military has bigger arms, the end"). At the very start of a conflict, sure, but that rapidly becomes very untrue because the real world operates on the "dynamic model".
who the hell has AT4?
Nobody currently, but in a conflict it's well-known that "little arms lead to bigger arms", and very quickly.
In the 1980s Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, for example, a Mujahideen fighter with just an AK-47 (or even just a pistol!) could shoot a Russian soldier who was carrying an RPG and his buddy who had a big case full of RPG rounds, and now guess what? The Mujahideen dude has an RPG and a shitload of warheads for it.
Don't fall for simplistic, incorrect "static model" thinking where you think one level deep and then stop (e.g. "the populace only has small arms, the military has bigger arms, the end"). At the start, sure, but that rapidly becomes untrue because the real world operates the "dynamic model".
who the hell has AT4?
Nobody currently, but in a conflict it's well-known that "little arms lead to bigger arms", and very quickly.
In the 1980s Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, for example, a Mujahideen fighter with just an AK-47 (or even just a pistol!) could shoot a Russian soldier who was carrying an RPG and his buddy who had a big case full of RPG rounds, and now guess what? The Mujahideen dude has an RPG and a shitload of warheads for it.
who the hell has AT4?
Nobody currently, but in a conflict it's well-known that "little arms lead to bigger arms", and very quickly.
In the 1980s Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, for example, a Mujahideen fighter with just an AK-47 could shoot a Russian soldier who was carrying an RPG and his buddy who had a big case full of RPG rounds, and now guess what? The Mujahideen dude has an RPG and a shitload of warheads for it.
who the hell has AT4?
Nobody currently, but in a conflict it's well-known that "little arms lead to bigger arms", and very quickly.
In the 1980s Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, for example, a Mujahideen fighter with just an AK-47 could shoot a Russian soldier who was carrying an RPG, and now guess what? The Mujahideen dude has an RPG.
who the hell has AT4?
Simple, "little arms lead to bigger arms".
In the 1980s Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, for example, a Mujahideen fighter with just an AK-47 could shoot a Russian soldier who was carrying an RPG, and now guess what? The Mujahideen dude has an RPG.
who the hell has AT4?
Simple, "little arms lead to bigger arms".
Typically when an advanced military attacks a populace that only has small arms, the populace shoots the advanced military's soldiers and just picks up their bigger weapons.
In the 1980s Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, for example, a Mujahideen fighter with just an AK-47 could shoot a Russian soldier who was carrying an RPG, and now guess what? The Mujahideen dude has an RPG.
The same principle applies to a variety of other situations.
The whole "your handgun and rifle can't go up against soldiers with heavy weapons like AT4s!" line of thinking is "static modelling", rather like saying "if we cut the income tax rate in half, the government will only get half as much tax revenue!" Nope, the world doesn't run on simplistic "static modelling", it REALLY runs on "dynamic modelling", where very soon the citizens have AT4s, and the government quadruples its tax revenue by halving income tax rates (as Reagan proved).
Stop simplistic and wrong static-model thinking where you only think one level deep. Switch to accurate dynamic-model thinking where you follow cause-effect chains just like what happens in the real world!
who the hell has AT4?
Simple, "little arms lead to bigger arms".
Typically when an advanced military attacks a populace that only has small arms, the populace shoots the advanced military's soldiers and picks up their weapon.
In the 1980s Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, for example, a Mujahideen fighter with just an AK-47 could shoot a Russian soldier who was carrying an RPG, and now guess what? The Mujahideen dude has an RPG.
The same principle applies to a variety of other situations.
The whole "your handgun and rifle can't go up against soldiers with heavy weapons like AT4s!" line of thinking is "static modelling", rather like saying "if we cut the income tax rate in half, the government will only get half as much tax revenue!" Nope, the world REALLY runs on "dynamic modelling", where pretty soon citizens have AT4s, and the government quadruples its tax revenue by halving income tax rates (as Reagan proved).
Stop simplistic static-model thinking, switch to accurate dynamic-model thinking! It's what really happens.