Can you win a war with only light infantry in the 21st century?

delft said:

I like Solarz sketch of an independence war for Scotland but expect and trust that Scotland will, or will not, become independent without such horrors.

Click to expand...

A Scottish war of Independence is about as likely as cows jumping over the moon.Perhaps Solarz should consider China's backyard as a more possible scenario. Eg Xinjiang. Where insurgents suported indirectly by elements within neigbouring countries clash against the PAP which I believe, are better equipped than your average Chinese army division.

bladerunner said:

A Scottish war of Independence is about as likely as cows jumping over the moon.Perhaps Solarz should consider China's backyard as a more possible scenario. Eg Xinjiang. Where insurgents suported indirectly by elements within neigbouring countries clash against the PAP which I believe, are better equipped than your average Chinese army division.

Click to expand...

Christ, is every one of your posts going to be China bashing? You can't even leave a little "Braveheart" reference in peace?

Another thing we need to understand is the ever-changing characteristics of the primary elements of war and how we define them. For example, we know what defines a classic light infantry, heavy infantry, and cavalry in ancient warfare. We can even say archers and siege weapons were the artillery of the past. By the time gunpowder kicks in, artillery now meant cannons. Today, artillery means more than just howitzers, but also missiles and rockets. So what defines as artillery, cavalry, infantry today, as well as what characteristics should now be associated with each should also be revised.

bladerunner said:

Where insurgents suported indirectly by elements within neigbouring countries clash against the PAP which I believe, are better equipped than your average Chinese army division.

Click to expand...

You kidding? PAP equipped better than PLA? PAP is considered secondary units and back-up to the PLA. PAP would never be better equipped than the PLA, with a few exceptions such as SWAT units within PAP. And the CCP and PLA/PAP would never allow the opposition in Xinjiang to grow to anything even remotely close to an organized fighting unit. So that scenario would not happen.

In the 50s and the 60s, Tibetan exiles were armed and trained by India and the CIA. No Tibetan insurgent sent into Chinese controlled Tibet was ever heard from again. So depending on the spin, you can make an argument either way.

solarz said:

Christ, is every one of your posts going to be China bashing? You can't even leave a little "Braveheart" reference in peace?

Click to expand...

China bashing?

LOL ... Considering the question of Scottish independence has been constitutionally provided for through a simple vote, what was the point of your little "Braveheart" reference and talk of a England Scottish war, if it's nothing more than trolling or Uk bashing ? Futhermore I do not regret my suggestion that you look closer to home for scenarios that are more apt to the topic you are discussing and the employment of tactics that prevent a successful uprising in the first place.

vesicles said:

You kidding? PAP equipped better than PLA? PAP is considered secondary units and back-up to the PLA. PAP would never be better equipped than the PLA, with a few exceptions such as SWAT units within PAP. And the CCP and PLA/PAP would never allow the opposition in Xinjiang to grow to anything even remotely close to an organized fighting unit. So that scenario would not happen.

Click to expand...

My error

I was actually referring to the forces in Xinjiang, selecting some points of view from a book by Martin Wayne "China's war on counter Terrorism: counter insurgency, politics and internal security."
and paraphrasing what he says on page 75 " There is an estimated 50-100, 000 troops PLA troops in Xinjiang. These 5 divisions may be of poor quality lack man power/training and modern weapon and equipment..... the one exception may be the fourth division"

There is also the POV that the PLA have played more of a supporting role to the PAP post 95/6

bladerunner said:

China bashing?

LOL ... Considering the question of Scottish independence has been constitutionally provided for through a simple vote, what was the point of your little "Braveheart" reference and talk of a England Scottish war, if it's nothing more than trolling or Uk bashing ? Futhermore I do not regret my suggestion that you look closer to home for scenarios that are more apt to the topic you are discussing and the employment of tactics that prevent a successful uprising in the first place.

Click to expand...

In other words, you insist on politicizing an otherwise hypothetical scenario.

solarz said:

In other words, you insist on politicizing an otherwise hypothetical scenario.

Click to expand...

While you were presenting your line of thought pretty well until you went off on a tangent to present some politically weighted silliness.

The reason why I saying that you went off on a tangent was that the thread was essentially China centric and devloping world orientated.

FFS, using real world countries and forces was only meant to act as proxies so we canget to the meat of discussing the tactics and strategies involved without having to spend the huge amount of time to come up with a purely fictional scenario for opfor to allow for a meaningful discussion. How likely that such a thing would happen in the real world is entirely irrelvant.

Also, if anyone bothered to think, they would realize that trying to defeat a force as vast as the PLA with PAP support inside of China with only light infantry would require the light infantry force to have numbers roughly equivilant to that of the Indian population to have much chance of success.

Light infantry needs massive numerical superiority to have any chance against a combined force army, the PLA and PAP, has both the firepower and would outnumber any other standing army in the world. That is one of the main reasons why there has never been a single case of anyone being able to wage an insurgency war against the PRC dispite said insurgents being trained and equipped and supported by the USA.

If you were truely looking for a scenario where a light infantry only force would have a chance against a combined arms conventional army, the PLA is just about the last foe you should be looking at.

If you want to country bash, please at least go do it in a thread that gives you a pretext to do so. If you really really cannot wrap your head around the idea of using real world countries as proxies, how about we call Scotland Kiltland and England FishnChipland?



Anyways, back on topic.

Firstly, I think 20k light infantry against 5k combined arms force is a little on the light side on both sides. There is just no way a force of 5k can hope to secure and garrion a territory the size of scotland. I think 20k combined force and 200-400k light infantry would be more realistic.

Even then, I think the light infantry would need more help, maybe we can flesh this out a little by saying that the scots had a referndum and overwhelmingly voted for independence, and the English said 'computer says no', which led to Scotland declearing independence unilaturally and the British sent the troops in. EU is royaly peeved and is actively supporting the insurgency with weapons, supplies and secure satillite communications, and enforcing a naval 'no sail zone' around scotland, but is not ready to get into a shooting war with the British, thus no direct military intervention.