User blog comment:HanSolo69/Religious Extremism Opposites!!! Taliban vs. The Covenant, The Sword, and the Arm of the Lord/@comment-379205-20170809025200

119's "Fanatics" Edges:


 * Melee: The AK-47 bayonet takes this easily as it can be attached to the AK, meaning it has a longer reach and the user does not have to switch weapons to engage in melee combat- they can thrusting the the bayonet and then keep shooting. This gives it the definitive edge over the KA-BAR. Edge: Taliban


 * Handguns: The Tokarev fires a necked-down bullet similar to a scaled-down rifle round, giving it a higher velocity and greater stopping power. The Ruger, on the other hand, fires a .22 round, which an kill a human, but is primarily intended for target shooting. Simply put, the Tokarev was made to kill a man, the Ruger was not, meaning the Tokarev will be more likely to kill or incapacitate a target in one shot. In spite of the silencer, I still give the edge to the Taliban's Tokarev pistol.


 * SMGs: The PPS-42 has a slightly larger magazine, a more effective stock and a lower rate of fire, making it easier to aim and control. On the other hand, the MAC-10 has a suppressor and a higher rate of fire, not to mention a larger round, however, the difference in firepower may not be as great as first appears because of the necked-down Tokarev round and its high velocity. For this reason, I will call this Even


 * Assault Rifles: The AK-47 has a larger magazine, was built for full auto fire, and is more reliable, while the G3 has a higher muzzle velocity. While the G3 is a good weapon with a higher muzzle velocity and greater accuracy at long range, but the variant used by the CSA is jury rigged for full-auto fire, meaning it may not stand up as well as a purposes-built automatic, and may also not be able to be switched back to semi-auto. For this reason, I give a slight edge to the Taliban and their AK-47.


 * Specials: A shotgun is a deadly weapon at close range, however, in a mountain environment, its maximum range with buckshot of only about 50 meters will limit its utility. The RPG-7, on the other hand, essentially gives the Taliban "handheld artillery", allowing them to bombard their enemies with explosive rockets from a distance, even more so with the scope. Edge: Taliban


 * X-Factors: The CSA had a training facility and some members with military experience, while some of the Taliban had training from members with experience in terrorist training camps, some only know the bare basics of using a firearm. For this reason, the CSA get an edge for training, however the suffer in other areas. The CSA had difficulty getting military-grade arms, and thus used mostly civilian market hardware, sometimes modified to fire full auto, while the the Taliban were supplied by the US, as well as the Chinese (less well known fact- because of the Sino-Soviet split, the Chinese and Soviets operated against each other almost as much as the Americans), not to mention hardware taken from the Soviet invaders. In terms of combat experience, the Taliban are not match for trained Western military forces in a stand-up fight, but they are masters of guerilla warfare, and for all their firepower, the Soviets were driven out of Afghanistan and the US and NATO are still fighting them. The CSA's successes were a few shootings and attempted bombings, plus the OKC Bombing if you count McVeigh as a member, and that is debatable as by the the time of the bombing, he hadn't been officially affiliated with them for years. As for fanaticism, both of the are fundamentalist nutjobs who believe they are doing the work of God and will go to heaven if they die in battle, and are thus unafraid to die, so in that regard they are even.

WINNER: Taliban

The CSA may have more members with military training, but they never racked up the combat experience of the Taliban, nor were they ever supported by major foreign powers, let alone actually drove off the military of a superpower in a guerilla war. For this reason, in this clash of the crazies, the Taliban will come out victorious.