Here is one man's tactical loadout in Ukraine: It's pretty much 'come as you are' with what you have. He has civilian firearms with a limited supply of ammo which is not likely to be replenished until he 'acquires' weapons and ammo from enemy or friendly casualties. Hope he survives until a peace of some sorts can be achieved. I hope he has some reading material to help him on his mission...am sure he can glean some useful stuff from: FM 3-21.8: The Infantry Rifle Platoon And Squad GlobalSecurity.org - Reliable Security Information
You know Chello, your subject title got me thinking... "A Ukrainian Civilian Partisan..." In war, the word 'partisan' could also easily be misconstrued to mean an insignialess terrorist, criminal. infiltrator, or saboteur, given a kangaroo court and stood against the nearest wall. Please don't get me wrong as I would have used the same word, it just got me to thinking... BTW good post. As far as I know, Russia has not signed the Geneva Convention; however, the Soviet Union did in 1954 and Putin says this is not a war but a 'Special Military Operation' so lots of variables here but it does make me wonder if the civilians that are picking up their rifles in defense of their country are treated as part of the Ukraine military, considered a militia or...? This might be worthy of discussion in a separate post... EDIT: Russia is considered to have violated the Convention upon numerous occasions according to this website but doesn't make reference to the citizen militia and if they are treated the same as Ukraine military: The Geneva Conventions: How Russia breaches them and blames Ukraine for it. VoxCheck explains (voxukraine.org)
Wouldn't Maquis be a better name for this type of underground guerilla warfare. Partisan connotes leftist leaning.
Well dang me if the Johnny Rebs didn't make use of the term in 1862!! Who knew that the word Partisan in its military context is referenced in the CSA as well!!?? Marquis is a French word most commonly associated with the French resistance in WW2. The word 'partisan'' has a more universal application than marquis and therefore it would be the more applicable term for general usage. Incidentally the word partisan also seems to have French / Italian linguistic etymologies, though its use isn't constrained to France or Italy alone. The Laws of Armed Conflict makes reference to 'Irregular Combatants' as a synonym for partisans in its literature: More to follow. You seem to say 'leftist learning' like it's a bad thing.
the Geneva Convention covers "recognized uniforms" - dog tags played a bigger part of that than the clothing in WW2 - the US and the allies were the only ones issuing fresh clothing toward the end of the war - the Japanese were captured wearing those fricking diaper deals they wore - the frontline Krauts were wearing whatever was available and stealing clothing from the POWs .... I don't think shooting Ukrainians will differ much to the Russians - they catch a member of a convoy ambush team - killed off a a few APCs and tanks >>> don't think they will too crazy about exchanging him in a few months when the war ends - these surviving UK veterans are going to be royal pain in the azz for decades to come ...
Re: #4. Was unaware of CSA use of that term. That handbill is not unlike "Letters of Marque" from colonial age sovereigns. I stand corrected. (Actually I'm sitting corrected). Was there a political difference between the underground and the partisans? They had similar goals but different agendas. The maquis were a localized uprising in a non-urbanized region of France. Little difference what term we use to refer to irregular forces. Even though they are defending their country they, as guerilla combatants, have little protection under international law. How did the Soviets deal with captured Afghanis during that unpleasantness? Do Ukrainians get better treatment because they are more closely related or worse? And yeah, from my first memories leftist, Soviets (Rooskies), Chi-comm, East Germans, North Koreans, et al were the Devil's spawn. As the twig is bent, so grows the tree. I know you have military experience, What would you do in a similar situation?
During the American Civil War, the Yankees threatened to hang any and all Partisan Rangers...until the Partisan Rangers threatened to do the same to captured Yankees! Then the Yankees sang a different tune. I'm sure that both sides were reluctant to take prisoners, but they shot them rather than hung them!
He's using a .30-06 rifle? Where did he get it and how does he get ammo for it? If you are a partisan and using hollow-point or polymer tipped ammo, the best that you can hope for is a bullet to the head! Using such ammo is against the rules of war, and a war crime!
Not yet a member of nato they may not be under any rules and for that matter if some one is fighting for their country screw the rules. Molotov cocktails aren't legal either, but this is war. I don't know all the facts concerning this invasion, but it is an invasion nonetheless. If someone is breaking into your home they should expect to pay the ultimate price for doing so.
Re post #9. Spot on Arleigh. Make the costs of invasion too high. Let the invaders pay the blood price. See if the invaders want control and power as much as the Ukrainians want freedom.
This guy is Georgian (the one next to Russia) not Ukrainian! Still a partisan should arm himself with weapons that use the same ammunition as your enemy. In this case 7.63x39 or 7.62x54R, etc., resupply would be easier, and the sounds of gunfire don't stand out as unusual! A .30-06 is gonna stick out like a sore thumb! I would use any and all ammo that I have in such a fight, but I would go in knowing what will happen if I were captured, especially if I had anything but FMJ ammo, and even then, I wouldn't expect to be treated as a POW. Better to go down fighting, as the alternatives suck!
