#tactical advantage

[patchodraws]

interrupting my fandom pride posts to post emik ordo and cherri with their flag colours !! happy pride, even to those in a galaxy far far away!

[everythingthemoontouches]

It takes a spark to start a forest fire.

But just because you can fight doesn't mean you should. A true Queen knows to still the hand that reaches for her sword when negotiation will do the job.

I'm reminded of Padmavat, how the Queen decided to sacrifice herself to the fire instead of being held hostage when their kingdom lost the war. It could t have been an easy choice. That's what being the feminine force is about. Reach within for answers. Consider all possible outcomes. And means at your disposal. Your intuition is everything. Then say your prayers and act on your decision.

It takes a shit ton of strength to do something that requires an all or nothing approach.

The greatest female warriors were said to be touched by a hint of madness

Close your eyes and let the wind guide you to your core strength.

[dare-g]

Tactical Advantage (2006)

[cognitohazard]

its okay for liking midas

at least you dont like the Ninja skin unironically

i like the ninja skin actually bc when i see another player with it i enter a rage state and run them over with a car

[quarkmaster]

Tactical Advantage

my first ever card in Magic The Gathering! /o/ Tactical Advantage AD : Andrew Vallas this is available for mtg arena only

lie setiawan

[tattooed-alchemist]

Actually Yes, the Left Can Defeat The United States Militarily

“just imagine the idea that the bitter infighting on the Left could somehow be a tactical advantage. It’s almost too good to pass up.”

This incredible feedback loop is damn near impossible to stop once it starts. “Even under best case assumptions,” writes The Department of Operations Research at the Naval Postgraduate School “we show that the government cannot totally eradicate the insurgency by force. The best it can do is contain it at a certain fixed level.”

It’s easy to see why:

“One of the greatest small unit commanders and unconventional warfare experts in modern times, Richard Marcinko, described three things needed to win in combat: speed, surprise, and violence of action. When transferred to the strategic and operational levels, the insurgency possesses these attributes. The greatest advantages of the insurgency are:

Mobility: The refusal to stay in a static location negates technologically advanced weapons systems.

Initiative: The insurgency is able to choose the time and place of most of the battles they fight.

Surprise: Because the insurgents have the ability to choose the time and place of the fight, they can select moments when the opposition is weakest.

Camouflage: The insurgent does not wear a uniform. As the father of modern insurgency, Michael Collins, said: ‘Our uniform will be that of the man on the street and the peasant in the field.’ This makes distinguishing between friend and foe difficult for the opposition.

Unpredictability: A force that is unpredictable on a battlefield is dangerous. Field commanders train to fight conventional wars, in which both sides attempt to take and hold territory, the insurgent seeks destabilization of the opposition’s government, not land. Tactics designed to defeat a conventional army are useless against an enemy that doesn’t seek to hold territory.

Factional divides: In a conventional military setting, a force should function like a well-oiled machine and have clear command and control. Insurgencies typically operate with loose alliances between factions who follow a particular commander. Sometimes they work together, sometimes they don’t. Just when the opposition gains a feel for the tactics and strategy of an insurgent commander, a new one arises. This leads to unpredictable actions being taken by the various factions, which increases their overall effectiveness.”

This is wild shit, something everyone from Egoists to Maoists should be discussing in earnest. That last one is particularly intriguing: just imagine the idea that the bitter infighting on the Left could somehow be a tactical advantage. It’s almost too good to pass up.

...

But in an Egoist sense, a claimed zone of territory made lawless and effectively ungovernable, too chaotic for any one force to hold the upper hand…much promise in that. Disrupt. Discredit. Militias and communes defining themselves town by town, street by street, aligning and breaking apart as they see fit. No one person to corrupt, arrest, or even kill. Put that on a generational track. Such zones could become infection points, cancerous bulbs on the body politic spreading “no-go” zones and destabilization. Bring Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya home. Read shit like this and start putting it to use where you live. Carve out new lives, new dreams, from the rotting carcass of a continent-spanning “society” and never look back. As long as insurrectionists remain popular and willing to continue the fight until the last breath(as the Seminoles did) they’re guaranteed a chunk of territory.

But are we prepared for that?

Is the Left willing to sacrifice the United States for a free but chaotic territory across a few states? Could we study sniper tactics, small arms maintenance, and urban/rural survivalism right alongside economic and gender theory? Are we willing to selfishly demand our right to live as we see fit? Are we willing to struggle, fight, and even commit violence…for a decade? Two? How bad do we really want this?

Do we really, really want to win…and are we prepared to pivot towards what that might mean?

Difficult questions, ones I don’t have the answer for. We have nowhere near the training, or the infrastructure, or even the popular support we’d need anyway.

But we could. And that’s why we need to start thinking about it.