> My main point here is that guerilla warfare can be and often has been a
> very successful form of warfare for a weaker force against a stronger one.
> As it is in Sartar.
This discussion reminds me of the legal fiction (which preoccupied the Romans, who first developed it) that somewhat arbitrarily distinguishes between *real* states and 'bandit kingdoms', opposing armies of resistence and 'bandit gangs', rebel claimants to an invaded throne and 'bandit leaders'.
It was often difficult to distinguish between banditry and warfare (for invader and resister alike) so the Romans defined the distinction in law. The whole philosophy of 'legitimate statehood' is extremely dodgy.
Mind, you, having been 'liberated' once or twice by a one-legged duck xxxxxx err freedom fighter, I can say that at the time it didn't feel like I was giving my all for Sartar. :)
John
nysalor_at_p... John Hughes
.....With one silent laugh
You tilted the night
and the garden ran with stars.
Powered by hypermail