TexasCHLforum.com

Paladin wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 8:26 am Great read! Thanks!

This part is classic:

George Washington did the same in the American Revolution, abandoning the guerrilla tactics that had served the colonists so well in the conflict’s early stages. “As quickly as he could,” William Polk writes in “Violent Politics,” a history of unconventional warfare, Washington “devoted his energies to creating a British-type army, the Continental Line. As a result, he was defeated time after time and almost lost the war.”

There is this propaganda about the American Revolution that creating a professional army won the Revolution and the untrained militia couldn't fight... that is a total lie. If you follow the history of the battle at Lexington or Battle of Kings Mountain or Cowpens the militia was often able to strike devastating defeats against the British Empire with minimal cost in terms of lives and money simply by not playing by the British rules.

The militia scored again big time in the war of 1812 at Battle of New Orleans

It is pointed out that militia would only serve for a few days or weeks at a time, but in fact militia in most ways are far more persistent in holding ground in that they live and work in their local communities. Militia are ALWAYS THERE to defend their community and have a personal stake in it. Professional soldiers are only there when they get fed and paid. Many professional soldiers might rather be somewhere else.

The Annoyed Man wrote: ↑Sun Jul 19, 2020 7:11 am The guy in the picture in my previous post understands this instinctively.