The "want to be" gun confiscators would have a daunting job ahead of them

[JASmith]

I'm not talking about predicting the course of a conflict. I'm talking about what 120mm gun tanks can do to a neighborhood, versus what 5.56mm rifles can do to tanks.
....
And although the Russians eventually tired of fighting and withdrew their forces, casualty figures for that war vividly illustrate the devastating consequences to the civilian side in a military vs civilian matchup that I noted earlier: 15,000 Russians killed; 1,000,000 Afghans killed.

So, what else is new?

War is costly, civilians take the brunt of suffering, and are always at a disadvantage to well-trained forces with tehnological advantages. Nonetheless, the examples given show that determined armed resistance can prevail, even though at enormous costs.

How does this negate the value of the right to keep and bear arms?