Any military effectiveness is COMPLETELY and totally dependent on its ability to supply its front line troops. Zombies present a unique problem that any other foe does not. The problem is that any front has the potential of being a front line/point of attack. The reason most authors project the failure of the military is for the same reason we won wwii. Zombies by nature cut off the supply lines. When the bullets run out and all the big guns go quiet the numbers the army offers then become a liability/ammo so to speak for the other side.
They have it right, unless like in wwz (the z stands for zombies btw I read the book) they can corral themselves establish a front line and begin to push out containing/maintaining zombie free zones.
That is how we know to fight wars. We are not so good at fighting wars that friend and foes can occupy the same place. That is also why Russia went broke fighting in Afghanistan in the 80s, and why isis wants the west to fight a 50 year war or until we are broke.
They have it right, unless like in wwz (the z stands for zombies btw I read the book) they can corral themselves establish a front line and begin to push out containing/maintaining zombie free zones.
That is how we know to fight wars. We are not so good at fighting wars that friend and foes can occupy the same place. That is also why Russia went broke fighting in Afghanistan in the 80s, and why isis wants the west to fight a 50 year war or until we are broke.
