So there’s this organized, technologically superior culture, and they land on your planet and want your resources. They have a highly trained military and are heavily funded. But you have one thing they don’t: Heart.

“THEY’LL NEVER TAKE… OUR FREEDOM!!!”

What follows is a brutal battle that destroys your homeland, results in countless casualties but you manage to eek out a victory that causes the enemy to retreat. Horray! Victory is ours! Roll credits.

Oh my god, shut the fuck up. It’s modern conventional warfare.  There is no way you can win against a superior force in this way. Let’s assume that the battle that unfolded in Avatar is realistic (it’s not. If it was they’d have the capability of dropping a bomb from higher than 50 feet off the ground, and it would be a real bomb not a bunch of UPS packages but whatever), what’s the logical next step that would occur here? You caused this army to retreat, using a surprise attack and a lot of luck. And where have they retreated to? Their homes, which you have absolutely no ability to threaten. So what happens next?

Retaliation!

The occupying force was motivated by financial incentives which exist in the resources located in your home. Violence would only work if the conflict costs more than the profit to be made from it. It wouldn’t be too costly. They wouldn’t even need troops, just missiles and bombs. And you’ve just slaughtered thousands of troops, providing easy propaganda for them to avoid any public relations issues. Their hands are completely untied. Prepare for annihilation.

From the Navi perspective violence just isn’t practical. Let’s reexamine their goals:

They want to protect their land, nature, and their people. By undertaking violent action, they have lost a significant number of their own, and had their most sacred lands permanently destroyed or damaged by the invading force. This could have all been avoided.

So am I saying they should just roll over and let their land be taken? Absolutely, if they’re concerned with protecting their own interests. But instead, Jake Sully, douche bag that he is, gives a rousing speech which encourages them to instead seek revenge and punishment rather than a positive end. As a result, their land is destroyed further, via a completely avoidable attack on their true sacred land. Land which only becomes a threat to the invading force after it is used as a staging ground for a retaliatory act.

Finally they achieve their goal of making the enemy retreat as a result of heavy casualties. Which will later on result in further devastating attacks on their land and people. The inevitable result being that there will be nothing left worth defending, and the Navi will have their priorities reduced to merely surviving.
The end.

Now this isn’t really a critique of Avatar, it’s a film, it’s not trying to be completely realistic, it’s just presenting the audience with a graspable, conventional plot. What’s fascinating is how easily our culture eats up a story which basically says, “Violence works, so long as you’re passionate enough about your cause.”

It’s pretty obvious to me that in this scenario, violence most certainly does not work. It provides revenge and punishment, but it doesn’t serve the goals of the Na’vi, and it’s just not effective.

So, what would work?

1 • Understand the enemy

2 • Avoid creating an opportunity for the enemy

3 • Avoid unnecessary loss.

4 • Apply pressure.