"phil hunt" wrote in message
. ..
What would be sensible strategies/weapons for a middle-ranking
country to employ if it thought it is likely to be involved in a war
against the USA or other Western countries, say in the next 10
years?
[ SNIP ]

Fight an insurgency, and do it well. Plan for it, and train for it.
Pre-position necessary equipment, designate cells that people will belong to
(this could be done in such a way that even the people doing the designation
wouldn't know the specific composition of such cells, how the cell members
get into touch if the balloon goes up, or any of that). Move supplies and
weapons as soon as balloon goes up - that way, even if there is some
compromise, the stuff is no longer at A but is at B. And only the cell
members get to do the moving of the stuff.

Incidentally, the other Western countries *are* middle-ranking countries, so
this is really a "how do we defend against the US" question. Under those
circumstances I think one simply does not attempt conventional warfare - not
in the time frame you suggest. You'd lose everything you have. You allow
yourself to be occupied, then you start making life bad.

Given my suggestions, the weapons I would use are not dissimilar to what the
Iraqi insurgents are using. Except I'd expect it to be done better. And it
could be done much better. Leave the armour alone - go after the supply line
with command-detonated mines. Screw shooting down an Apache - mortar an
airfield with transport a/c on it. Use snipers that are actually proficient.
Ambush foot patrols. Destroy infrastructure. Etc etc.

AHS