GTAngler posted:antabanta posted:Django posted:antabanta posted:That same argument can be used to question the existence of the GDF. Every nation needs a defence force. I think Guyana would do better with a large militia (every citizen a soldier) and small standing army. It's difficult to overcome any nation where every citizen can take up arms in defence.
Especially when small poor countries can't afford some of the modern military equipment.
Precisely. Perfect examples are Israel and Vietnam during the US invasion.
Those are precisely two wrong examples. First of all they both have homogeneous populations. I assume in the case of Vietnam you mean the Vietcong. The Vietcong were a full time Communist Guerilla Army. Let's not beat around the bush. The GPM was a Paramilitary Force that supported the PNC. As I asked before what will be different in their mandate this time around? Let's differentiate between a Part-time military force that augments the army and a Political Military Arm of the Government. In Guyana's case, what is the difference between Army Reserves who are part-time soldiers and a militia?
Guyana's militia is an army of reservists. What does the militia have to do with the homogeneity of a population? Is your rejection of the GPM based on your view of it as a force that supported the PNC or because you genuinely think it's not needed?
A militia in South Vietnam was used to defend against North Vietnam. The viet cong used cadres of peasants to fight.
The GPM was never mandated as a political arm of the govt. The military and para-military units in Guyana, by their mission statements, are not party oriented. That may not be true in practice but the influence is largely race-based, hence party.