which one have more chance to win the war?

Question

a country with brave solders, but not equipments arm?

or a country with timid solders, but equipments arm?

Answer 1

The one with brave soldiers, the most dangerous weapon is a motivated soldier and his rifle.

Answer 2

I do not think you can give a definitive answer that one will always triumph over the other. Logic would suggest that inthe age of increasingly powerful arms the best equipped army will win. However, increasingly powerful and devistating weapons have existed since the end of WW2 and there have been very many occassions where the best equipped army have been defeated by brave but poorly equipped opponents.
Examples that come to mind include the obvious Vietnamese Communists defeat of the Southern administration (and effectively the might of the US); less well known is that 4 years later they also defeated a Chinese army invasion in a 2 week war in 1979 sparked by the Chinese anger at the Vietnamese interferance in Cambodia and overthrow of the tyranical Pol Pot. I can think of few more determined people than the Vietnamese and certainly in both these conflicts (and an earlier one with the French) the victor was the clear underdog in terms of military infrastructure.
Another notible example is that of the Sandanestas, they managed to defeat the Contra insurgents, again US backed, against all the odds. It was another story of incredible determination and resiliance. Of course, the Sandanestas got some support from the USSR but it was minimal to the resources at the disposal of the Contra's.
The achievements of Castro's small band to eventually overthrow another American backed dictatorship (all be it some would say for an equally undemocratic alternative) is another minor miracle.
A final example is the Eritrean's struggle for independence from Ethiopia. This went on for 30 years against a tyranical Government backed this time by the USSR. The Eritreans by comparrisom were the forgotten nation and attracted little or no international support in the way the sovereign states used in previous examples did. Yet, against all odds, Eritrea did achieve its soverignty from Ethiopia, maybe the most remarkable story of all.

Answer 3

If the army has taught the timid soldiers a thing or two about how to use the equipment, the brave young solders will be blasted to bits.

Answer 4

UM....OK This is how i see it

if timid soldiers had better weapons such as machine gun vs brave soldiers with knives and brass nuckles, timid soldiers will win

if timid soldiers had fists and same with brave soldiers, it could be vise versa, you'll be suprised at how someone could comepletely change and dominate when they're oppressed

NOW if timid soldiers had bazookas and brave soldiers had brass knuckles, its pretty much self explained isnt it, unless the timid soldiers are also dumb and do not know how to use bazookas or suck at aiming, in which the brave soldiers will win with brass knucks

Answer 5

a country with brave solders, but not equipments arm

as a pretty girl , why are you so intersted in politics ?

Answer 6

Guts win every time. Over dependence on tools leads to defeat every time. Ask VietNam about the as s whooping they ultimately delivered to a super-power despite many loses on the battlefield. It happened a while ago, unfortunately a lot of people don't remember it.

Answer 7

I would take brave soldiers over equipment, any day.

Answer 8

I'd say that the country with the 21st coward platoon armed with M16s will most likely defeat a dozen Rambos armed with sticks.

Answer 9

Superior thinking has always overcome superior force.