Just because we don't understand the logic behind it doesn't mean there is no logic behind it.

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

I'm not saying it's technology or that magic users have some advanced technology, but there is SOME logic behind it, even if we don't understand it.

Link?

We know that they are prejudice against Werewolves (Lupin), Half-breeds (Hagrid), and Muggles (The Weasleys aren't violently prejudice, but they commonly describe them as lower beings who deserve their pity). Considering who has been in power: Fudge, Umbridge, etc and who is funding them (The Malfoys of the world) it's not farfetched to assume a bias against Muggleborns/Halfbloods. Even if there WASN'T one, do you really see Hermione for example teaming up with Draco, Pansy and Voldemort to kill her parents and the rest of her family?

Why would they? In a war between them, the wizards would most likely be the aggressor due to madmen like Voldemort and people like the Malfoys who support them.

Where's your proof? All we know is that it made the effects feel like a cool breeze, not that it changed the fundemental properties of the fire. If the fire stopped putting out heat it wouldn't look like a fire anymore and the muggles would feel it.

It conjures up *something* which reflects the object in motion. A sufficient force would be able to destroy it.

How do you cast a flame freezing charm in the microsecond it takes for the blast to hit you?

It's still canon. Magic apparently isn't able to fix his eyes.

Insanity is still a mental condition that should be able to be cured by magic. It's a mental reaction to the vast amounts of pain, not a direct effect of the curse itself as far as we know.

Why couldn't they regrow his eye the same way they did Harry's bones?

Maybe, but it's still a physical deformity and if they can fix Lockhart removing Harry's bones they should be able to fix Fenrir removing part of his skin

Food:

You might be satiated for awhile but the nutrients would disappear after a period of time (according to HPL, it's hours).

We don't know of anything that slows down time, only something that reverses it. Don't you think Dumbledore would carry around an object to slow down time if he had one, especially considering the war?

 

OK, proof that JKR approves the Immobulus spell:

http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2003/0302-newsround-mzimba.htm

Specifically:

JKr tells the writers if they have something wrong; therefore, if the immobulus spell was one that was not to her liking then it wouldn't be in there.

We are not talking about a war between the magical government and the Muggle government, we are talking about an all out war, MUggles vs. Wizards. The reason for the war is not any idealogical difference, it is simply those with magic against those without. You cannot change sides in this as much as you cannot give or lose magic.

The proof is in POA chapter one, where it states that the flames are made into a "gentle, tickling sensation". It is not that the flames stop giving out heat, it is that the wizard is now immune to heat. Therefore the flames are still there, and the muggles can still feel it as the spell has not been cast on them, but the effects of the fire has been negated for the wizard.

You are still assuming Muggle rules apply, something that you can't do when talking of magic. Newton's laws do not apply: you are assuming that to stop an object it needs to encounter an equal and opposite force, and therefore if an object is traveling faster there needs to be a greater force to stop it. Your point is eventually that an object will have so great momentum that the impervious cannot stop it.

This is a false assumption. Magic breaks the laws of physics, including Newton's laws. The spell is an absolute: it repels physical objects. It does not exert an equal and opposite force, it just happens, as if by magic. In short, you are thinking like a Muggle.

No. Such a devise, like the time turners, is likely to be illegal.

 

Why exactly do you think it is the case that the laws of physics do not apply? It seems more likely to me to describe magic as manipulating matter and energy. When a wizard deflects an incoming projectile, he is manipulating the speed, direction, etc. He does so by exerting a force on the object. To say that it is just "magic" without mapping some sort of scheme onto it for the purposes of analysis defeats the entire point of this thread. Eventually it reduces your argument to saying, "Well, muggles can't beat wizards because they lack magic." And that's not very insightful. We have to develop ground rules for magic somewhere. We know already that the degree of magical power is proportional to the output. A more powerful wizard can levitate heavier objects, for example. Surely that must mean something in the case of flame-freezing charms. There must be some limits on the ability of these charms to immunize wizards from harm.

The biggest problem with saying that wizards manipulate matter and energy is that it is unclear where the matter and energy actually come from. I think this is the reason why fanfic authors are hesitant to have wizards be able to conjure all manner of objects with perfect fidelity. It grates against the two most basic laws of physics, conservation of mass-energy and entropy. Personally though, I've little trouble with it. It's like accepting FTL travel.

 

You seriously overrate wizards. Most wizards wouldn't even know what a gun was if they didn't take Muggle Studies or payed attention to Half-Bloods/Muggles. Even if one of the two pointed the object out... death.

Muggle: OMFG!! Thats a gu-!
- Shot -
Wizard: ...? Hermione? WAKE THE FUCK UP!
- Shot -

And if this is an all out battle, well, thats what we have bombs for.

 

Nothing is ever so definite in sides however. It wouldn't take much persuasion in benefits, immunity, and protection in the future to convince some muggleborns to help their side. As long as they are promised and guaranteed survival and allowed to rejoin the muggle world peacefully afterwards with many benefits, both in monetary terms and power, more than a few would be comfortable helping out. In that case, all it takes is using magic to conceal muggle weapons in which the outcome truely becomes hazy. How hard would it be to plant bombs nearby in one area by a muggleborn, using magic to conceal it? If you don't know what's coming, how can you protect yourself? Walking one second, dead the next.

Also, if any muggleborns were willing to sacrifice their lives, a suicide bomber can do quite a lot of damage if it is unexpected. Even if muggle biological weapons do not work and cannot infect other wizards from the inside, surprise in the form of a hidden bomb is enough to destabilize the government in one fell swoop.

Along the same lines, muggleborns can use magic in itself to do damage. The same spells that can be used against muggles can be utilized against wizards and witches. Imperious them then have them be cannon fodder for suicide bombs or use magic to kill. Panic would grip the general populace, just like the muggle populace will experience with imperious, about who is a traitor and who isn't.

The thing is, like Taure pointed out, it requires muggleborns/halfbloods to help out. Without help from magic users and dissent from within, muggles are screwed and will easily lose.

 

I firmly believe wizards would pwn muggles.

Perhaps because those wounds were caused by a werewolf?!

I also see there's not been a counter argument against the use of Dementors--for which there really isn't any Muggle defence for. Ahh, except for perhaps blindly nuking areas suspected of being filled with these creatures--but that's pretty far-fetched, and we don't even know if a nuke is enough to clear Dementors.

Not only Dementors, but hundreds of other magical creatures (Dragons, House Elves, Lethifolds, Merepeople, Giant Squid, Sirens, Centaurs, Phoenixes, Boggarts, Basilisks, Werewolves, Vampires, etc) will aid wizards against the Muggles--and really, what can Muggles do against them?

Ahh, and perhaps someone will argue that we're purely arguing the case for wizards only vs. muggles--but magic is magic, and science is science. Since we're not handicapping Muggles, why would we handicap magic?

Hmm. There also seems to be a lot of posters taking wizards for granted--mentioning facts like the Muggle Army trained soldiers would pwn the average wizard who'd be so surprised he wouldn't be able to fight back. But, why would a soldier be pitted against a civilian? Instead, try imagining a fight between trained Aurors and Hitwizards against army soldiers--that is a far better match.

Thus: trained soldier vs trained wizard, wizard would pwn--and civilian muggle vs civilian wizard, wizard would pwn

(I apologize if I'm not making much sense. Way~ too early for me atm. I feel rather disjointed in my thoughts; i'm sure you've all noticed.)

Also Potions! An undetectable poison in every major Muggle city's water--hundreds of thousand could be killed easily. There is just so many possible ways a smart wizard could take with this idea.

One last point: power is power. Pure magic is a match for pure science. The only difference then are the minds that control the power. Thus, a stupid Muggle with a gun will lose to a brilliant wizard like Dumbledore--and the reverse is true.

Also, the wizards would easily be able to take over the command centers and the muggle world leaders. Those pro-Muggle posters keep mentioning the all-powerful Nuclear arsenal--yet forget that a simple Imperius would have those world leaders turning the weapons against the Muggles themselves.

One person, I forget who, said that there are just too many Muggles for wizards to really beat--but if a smart wizard such as Dumbledore were to gain control of the US President's mind, get him to target every major Muggle city in the world, and launch all those Nukes--

Heh. It would be World War III. Muggles would begin to fight against Muggles. And wizards would be safe within their Muggle repelling wards and Fidelius and underground Ministries.

(Hmm. Actually, that would be a really cool plot-device. *off to write*)

So. Really--the victor depends on one thing only: who is the smarter? And frankly, Dumbledore--if pressed--could pwn the world.

~liath

 

In a full-out war with wizards and muggles, it depends on two things:

1st it'd depend on the relative population of wizards compared to muggles. If there are around 6000 times the amount of muggles compared to wizards (that'd be 1 000 000 wizards in the world), I'd say that muggles win. Because there are just too many muggles in the world to kill. You can nuke them, use Dementors on them, poison cities, do whatever but in the end there are still enough muggles left to find counters to magic (more on this later). For example, let's say that a group of 100 wizards come to poison London with potions (it's pretty big, so this is a reasonable number). They'd have to kill 600 000 people without having anybody die from accidents or anything in order to make their mission a success. You might say that this is possible - and I will say why it isn't in my 2nd reason. On the other hand, with a higher proportion of wizards to muggles, the wizards would definately win.

2nd the time length of the war. The longer the war goes on, the lower the chance wizards will win. There are two subfactors:

A. Wizard traitors. All the muggles have to do is to capture or convince one wizard to ally with them and get him to tell everything possible about the wizarding world, and they can find out everything they need. This longer the time frame, the more likelier this will happen. Out of a population of 1 million wizards, at least one wizard will help the muggles. Then they can use him as a trump card - e.g. drop a nuclear bomb on Diagon Alley - and develop counters to magic, which leads to my second part.

B. Counters to magic. Everything has a counter. Even magic. And the longer the war lasts, the more chances muggles have to discover the counters to magic with science (i.e. find the "magic" gene in the genetic code and create a virus to destroy it) - especially if a wizard is helping them. Unfortunately, wizards can't discover counters to muggle weapons because they lack the tradition of the scientific method. This means that the longer the war goes on, the higher the chance those wizards poisoning London will be stopped and killed. In a war, the wizards must strike hard and fast. If they fail to immediately win, they lose the war. If they do immediately win, they win (duh). There are rules governing magic, contrary to Taure's views. How do I prove this?

Well, let's postulate that magic has no rules/limitations whatsoever. Therefore I can predict that magic will destroy the universe because nothing limits it. Since the universe obviously hasn't been destroyed by magic, a rule has just been created limiting magic - which is that magic can't destroy the universe.

This entire post is way off-topic, so I'll say this about the topic: in a 1-on-1 battle, the wizard wins, everything else being equal.

 

In a one-on-one battle the wizard would win, but in a massed war the muggle would win becouse he would eventually use the nukes.

 

One of wizarding kind's strongest advantages is that muggles (with the exception of the muggleborn students' parents) aren't aware wizards exist. Every time they find out, they're obliviated (or dead by the end of the encounter, in the case of death eater attacks). You never get a large enough group of muggles together, that know what wizards are and what they're capable of, to form a competent resistance.

Their main weakness would be, as I see it, their complete lack of knowledge regarding muggle technology and the fact that they would, undoubtedly, drastically underestimate the muggles. Also, wizards are heavily outnumbered.

Another thing to take into consideration is that, in any war that was started by the wizards, it's likely the arrogant purebloods (probably deatheaters) that started it and slapped the stamp of approval on it. In that case, muggleborns and probably a good number of the halfbloods, would aid the muggles.

If muggles started it, due to fear of magic or what have you, the muggleborns would probably try to play peacemaker and get themselves ventilated by the muggles, so their benefit to the wizards would be negated anyway.

I doubt Hagrid is the best place to get sound information about the wizarding world. Also, assuming that wizards can't be hurt by muggle tech is an absurd stretch of that statement, no matter the source. It is far, far more likely that the reason why it's so 'impossible' for James and Lily to have been killed in a car crash is simply because everybody (every wizard, anyway) knows they were killed by Voldemort. Unless a wizard saw it coming, had their wand in hand already and had excellent reflexes, being magical wouldn't stop them from being flattened by a Mack truck. A healing potion can't save you if you've been crushed to death by a vehicle that jumped the median into oncoming traffic.
The Potters may have been skilled, fast and powerful enough to whip out a spell that would protect them from injury in an immenent car crash but I'm sure the average wizard isn't. Frankly, we haven't seen much to indicate that James and Lily were much more than an exceptional wizard/quidditch player and a really good charms student. Lily sure didn't sling many spells when she was toe-to-toe with Voldemort.
Apparating away from such a crash is likely, though one can assume that not everyone can apparate. Otherwise, why would you need a license.

They age better, sure. I'm not sure it counts for much more than that. Magical healing goes a long way but clearly there are instances where it can't heal you, nor can it replace a limb. We need look no further than Moody and Bill for proof of that. Does it say anywhere in canon that wizards heal faster or are more resistant to injury and disease? Or is it simply that injuries and disease are more easily fixed, when (and if) you have the proper potions and a skilled healer on hand?

I'm sure the fact that he was on the front line of two-plus magical wars has something to do with his quickdraw skills. You can't really hold Dumbledore up as an example of the average wizard.
The muggle equivalent of Dumbledore would likely be a decorated, veteran Navy seal (translate into your local equivalent where applicable) that is currently employed as a senator, diplomat and Dean of a private school who also happens to run a secret anti-terrorist task force and still deploys into combat on a semi-regular basis (and often pushes around the nation's leader because he has him by the balls).

The average wizard (read as non-deatheater/auror) is pathetic in a combat situation. Even a famous 'hero' like Lockhart turned out to be a complete moron when it came to combat. The only two things he was good at were memory charms and being a narcisistic douchebag. The average armed muggle would hand Gilderoy's ass to him unless the muggle was alone and Lockhart got a memory charm off first.

In an all-out war between muggles and wizards, the wizards would have some early victories followed by many, many crushing defeats. Where it would get dicey is when it degenerates into raids by hit-groups of wizards comprised of people like Moody, Dumbledore, Voldemort (not that they'd work together but I'm talking about skill levels). And infiltration by animagi, metamorphmagi and polyjuiced spies. Even then, once the muggles caught on, you'd better hope that a password came with that polyjuice or you're getting a bullet in the ear. Legilemency is apparently not that common.

I doubt that wizards have a catch-all spell that will protect them from guns, light and sound via flash-bang grenades, inhaled substances like tear-gas, nerve agents, etc. all at the same time. And the idea that they'd 'wear', at the same time, all of the zillion different charms that it might take to do each those things... It would be like a party of D&D characters layering a bunch of buffing spells before going into a dungeon; slightly ridiculous. I wonder if a shield that blocks physical objects would also block the compression wave from an explosion or if the wizards have a way to prevent radiation poisoning.

If we assume wizards can do all that, then we must also assume that the muggles could get their hands on some wizard blood, find the gene responsible for magical ability and whip up a modified flu, chicken pox, insert-plague-here that would only attack wizards. Release it into the atmosphere, food supply and water supply before any of the wizards know about it and... Boom! Most of the wizarding population is dead before they can figure out how to cope.

Considering the dearth of Potions Masters, Spell Crafters and other similar experts in the wizarding world, it would only take a few key strikes (or lucky shots) before most of the wizards' with the real technical know-how are gone. Muggle 'experts' are far more plentiful and less vulnerable to elimination.

Fudge's government seems incapable of catching or killing even the lowliest deatheater trainee without Harry and the Order stepping in (oh, and Scrimgeour caught Shunpike, lol) and the same goes for the average wizarding family. How people like that are going to mobilize against a world full of muggles is beyond me. Wizards are, above all else, complacent. They're using the same old spells and crap that they have been for decades and Wolfsbane is about all they have to show in the way of new advances. They're not going to get off the couch long enough to fight the muggles.

I would have chosen 'It could go either way.' as my poll answer.

Fact: Dementors will gladly attack wizards as well as muggles, so setting them loose on the population isn't something that is likely to happen unless Voldemort is the one doing it because he doesn't care who lives or does as long as he survives.
Fact: There are a paltry handful of people who apparently know how to 'control' the dementors, so it's not like every wizard will have a chained attack-dementor at his disposal.
Fact: Whatever method of control is being applied to the dementors, it's apparently not foolproof, considering that they betrayed the Ministry to do Voldemort's bidding.

If the dementors were set loose to kill willy-nilly, I doubt they'd refrain from killing any wizards they came across. And, as we know, there aren't even many adults that can manage a passable Patronus charm.

Why would those other creatures fight the muggles for the sake of wizards? Dragons, basilisks, lethifolds and boggarts are, again, just as likely to harm a wizard as they are a muggle. Maybe even moreso, considering that if a muggle can't see a boggart, they aren't going to be afraid of it. It's only in fanfic that we see Harry and Voldemort flying into battle on the backs of dragons. In canon, there's no such thing as a tame dragon. They barely managed to get those dragons for the Triwizard Tournament to cooperate and those were in cages/chains. The wizard aren't going to be taking these things into battle and if they let them loose to kill indiscriminately, they will probably attack their captors first.

I don't see merpeople or giant squid figuring too heavily in the war...

Centaurs will NOT fight to defend wizards. They wouldn't get involved in the war. Ignoring that obvious fact, they're horses with a human torso stuck on them that happen to have a fondness for astrologically-based divination and, perhaps, some skill in archery. Muggles with firearms would eat them for breakfast and send what's left to the glue factory.

House elves are never used as anything but servants, despite the fact that they would appear, on the surface, to make for the perfect spies and assassins. They might fight to defend their masters if their masters are attacked but I don't see them being sent into battle unprovoked. Dobby doesn't even do that, he only defended Harry from an overt and immediate threat and he's considered extremely unusual for a house elf.

Werewolves would be far too easy for the muggles to kill for them to get involved, especially since they have no reason to fight; the wizards treat them like shit.

Vampires would be even less likely to side with the wizards. They'd probably hide out and wait to see who's left when the smoke clears.

Phoenixes are too rare to make much difference and, if their healing powers and calming song are any indication, are innately good creatures. They wouldn't attack muggles unless it was the right thing to do and even then, probably only if they were asked to by their human companion.

Are sirens even mentioned in any of the books? I know for a fact they aren't in anything before HBP because I have the other books in a searchable format.

As for the et cetera; I could see a group of muggles in hazmat/bio gear aboard an A-10 or an Apache taking out a Nundu with zero casualties before I could see wizards doing the same. Most dangerous magical creatures are considered dangerous precisely because they are just as likely to attack wizards as they are muggles. If magical creatures only killed muggles, I doubt many Malfoy-minded purebloods would give enough of a shit to label them as being dangerous. Likewise, if a wizard could order a dangerous creature like a nundu, chimera or dragon to 'Sit!', 'Stay!', 'Attack!' or 'Please don't kill me!' and actually have them obey, they wouldn't BE very dangerous, would they?

If a nundu would listen to what wizards commanded, it wouldn't take a hundred skilled wizards to bring one down.

Where are all of these tame creatures that obey orders supposed to come from? Show me that there's a zoo of trained lethifolds and dragons somewhere in the DOM, and I'll prove to you that Stubby Boardman is part of the Rotfang Conspiracy.

 

i suppose that it would mostly depend on the wizard--are they more inclined towards curses/hexes or charms? I'd imagine that a wizard that focuses more on charms, or uses spells that rely less on actually hitting the muggle, would be more successful, should we just consider this particular muggle's probable tendency towards dodging (which, really, when confronted with a magic spell zooming your way, wouldnt you do the same?). I'd imagine that the impervious spell works depending on how much magic you put into it; the force applied by a bullet (depending on the calibur) would probably break through that, as i doubt that the impervious is supposed to protect against that much force (as applied in POA, it simply reflected rain; rain delivers relatively little force compared to a bullet fired from a gun). Keep in mind that a bullet is a small piece of metal moving roughly at the rate of about 3,060 feet a second. I doubt that an impervious would stop a boulder from crushing someone if it were dropped on them; would it stop a bullet? The wizard's best bet would be a shield charm; however, same rules apply. I'm sure that a magical shield would suffer the same under a bullet's force, but a conjured shield would provide better coverage and would almost definitely block a bullet.

However, i don't think it entirely fair that a muggle were to get a simple pistol; a wand can cast a much larger variety and powerful spells than a simple pistol. a submachine gun would be much more fair, or at least a high powered rifle.

I have a significant feeling that muggle weapon technology would be far superior to wizarding weapon technology. Would any sort of ward stop a missile, or a barrage? Could a wizard be able to stop someone from sniping as easily as a muggle could move out of the way of a spell fired at long range? Granted, apparation provides an easy means of escape, but not one of reprisal if one doesnt know where to find the sniper.

Most important is of course numbers; think of the comparison between muggle military numbers and wizard military numbers. Wizards are trained to fight as, at best, groups (of aurors); muggles are trained to fight in companies (which vary in size from several dozen to several hundred; depending on what army we're talkign about).

I'm also convinced that wizarding arrogance will prevent them from acting decisively in a wartime situation. They understand little of muggle technology and weapons; even muggleborns spend little more than 2 months a year at home, and doubtedly in environments that precipitate understanding of muggle weapons and warfare (given their ages). Once again, wizarding arrogance will most likely prohibit input from those that do have understanding of muggle technology.

I understand that this thread started as a competition between one muggle and one wizard; however, while Aurors may be well trained to fight as individuals, soldiers work much better together in units. And while wizards are generally limited to one wand, muggle soldiers often varry more than one firearm, and often other things such as grenades--providing a separate means of fighting from the standard gun--and knives, being well-versed in techniques involving close-quarter combat (which most wizards would be at a disadvantage with, given the difficulty of using a wand in such a situation). Do you remember how everyone fought in the books? Whether it was the death eaters or members of the order (some of whom were aurors), they often didn't seek cover, or higher ground, or anything of the such. Bill and several others were easily overwhelmed by Fenrir Greyback and members of his pack (untransformed).

Alright, I'm sorry if i rambled. I'm done now. It's late (early), i'm going to bed.

~DarkSov~

 

Why would they not? If a war really does break out between Muggles and Wizards, I doubt magical creatures would side for Muggles or even stay out of it.

Also, Dementors can be controlled to an extent--say, "Hey guys, we'll give you complete free reign on kissing up the souls of all Muggles--as long as you leave wizard-folk alone." Why wouldn't Dementors take the wizards up on that?

The same offer could be made to Dragons, etc.

The same is true for House Elves and what-not. After all, by your logic, no one would then be able to attack a wizard at his home since he'd be protected by his House Elves.

 

A war between wizards and muggles. The wizards would win easily, for most all of the reasons Taure has given. Magic is, by definition, not science. No bullet, no matter how fast it is going, no matter even if it is armor piercing, would pierce a magic shield or impervious charm. The muggles wouldn't nuke the wizards because the only places that they would be known to exist are areas like Hogwarts (a school, by the way. It'd take a really fucked up muggle to bomb that) that would screw up the electronic gizmo that makes it explode. Otherwise, they'd just be bombing themselves.

However, the wizards would never be able to kill every last muggle on the Earth, and more over, it would be a very bad idea to do so. They've got problems with inbreeding as it is. Not to mention how underpopulated the planet would become. The animals would rise again, lead by the magical ones.

 

In my opinion the muggles would win because every muggle who knows of magic would try to find out more about it, but most wizards give a fuck about the muggle world.
And I can't see someone who was his whole life told that muggles are scum at once start to investigate what the muggles weapons are.

Also I don't think that in an all out war muggles vs wizards there would be a big battle because both sides don't know much about the other side and especial don't know the limits of the other side so it would be mostly special teams with terror attacks and no wizard home would ever be able to protect himself to 100% as would no muggle be able, but as I think there are more muggles then wizards.

But I agree that some wizards like Dumbledore ore Voldemort could never taken down by a muggle if they are careful enough.

 

Why not? The weasleys are quite safe from muggles detection and as far as we know they live near a muggle town.

Safe from wizards is another question entirely.

 

I'll revise my opinions, over a long war, muggles might stand a chance at winning. But if wizards acted decisively in the beginning stages of the war, then they would win. Simply send some well trained wizards in, apparating them into the homes of the muggles leaders, both political and military, use legillimany to get all pertinent information out of them quickly, then use a memory chamr to turn them into gurgling babies. How's the muggle world going to fight without its military elite and political leaders?

 

However, there is one flaw to that plan. It would require a predetermined plan on where and when to attack, which in turn would place squarely the blame on the (pureblood) wizards for the war. I doubt most wizards, even those in charge, would know where to attack first and be bothered to research all this unless a preemptive strike was desired. Nor would muggleborns or halfbloods that might know this type of information be inclined to help start a war. The only way to prevent a PR disaster and having defections from the muggleborn/halfblood ranks is to leak out information of the existance of wizards and witches and let them strike first then go on the offensive but that's playing with fire.

 

If the muggle world caught wind of the wizarding one, and decided that destroying all wizards was the way to go, they would not have a chance. Not all wizards have the power of Dumbledore and Riddle, but just one of them is capable of causing sufficient havoc to put large numbers of military personal out of action. As has already been pointed out, wizards are ideal for guerilla war-fare. Even Mundungus Fletcher is capable of aperating, and—given the ease with which Voldemort holds the wizarding world in terror despite they’re own magical abilities and wards—one can only presume that a bunch of muggles will find it even more difficult to defend against an elite task force of twenty-or-so highly trained wizards and witches. One thing that has not been addressed is the muggle’s reliance on their technologies. If one were to permanently take out the electric power grid the muggle world would quickly be reduced back into the dark-ages. You wouldn’t need to kill off the muggles then, you’d keep them firmly under your control—permitting wizards and witches rule of different areas in a sort of wizarding nobility. You then remove muggleborns from their muggle parents and foster them out to various wizarding families, allowing them to be integrated into wizarding culture from the start of their young lives. This way you avoid both a marked decrease in the number of wizarding children and muggle influences on wizarding culture.

 

How do you keep them under control? How do you exactly disable electricity on a permanent basis? Just because electricity is such a major part of our lives doesn't mean they are necessary to run a precise military operation. Radios, messangers, and other forms of communication are still possible. Weapons are still available and not all bombs are really hard to make. It's impossible to completely eliminate resistance in every manner and with the overwhelming numbers the muggles have, I doubt any form of muggle slavery would exist on the large scale you speak of. Especially since this scale of slavery would not be appreciated by all wizards and internal dissension would result. If there would be a war, the end result would have the be the complete domination of either the Muggles or the Wizards with only pockets of resistance from the other available after the large scale world.

By the way, just out of curiousity, wouldn't this war basically be a MAD situation? I'm sure in the long run, wizards might win but the magical population would be lowered by quite a bit and much of the Earth's land would be ruined. Fallout and climate changes would occur and at the very least this would be a case where no one truely wins with the Earth that way.

 

I think I'll deal with the magical creature being such a good advantage for the wizard in this post.

Dementors - They breed, therefore they can die. I'm going to assume here that dementors are an actual creature spawned from nature and not some lab experiment gone wrong. If they are a result of some form of evolution then assuming they are everything the pro-wizard people think they are then no other species would exist on earth. It's assumed that they are bottomless pits for souls and can eat non-stop and that their population of probably 1000 could easily make it's way through 6 billion souls in one go. When they are more likely creatures that feed off of emotions and not souls (if they are truly controlled by the ministry and need souls to survive they would probably die of starvation if they only souls they get are when some one is sentenced to 'death'). So going by canon one soul every few months is enough to satisfy the hunger of the entire population, so in a battle they would be more of a distraction (depressing aura) than an actual fighting force.

Centaurs - They seem to hate wizards and would rather keep to them selves than have to fight a war. They are more likely to move deeper into the forests and carry on with their lives.

Merpeople - Water bound people... not exactly hard to defeat, more than likely they would also hide their existence away and carry on with their lives.

Giants & Trolls - These are the "armored vehicles" of they wizarding world, they would be the front line in a battle. They are also the only creatures that we are introduced to that would no doubt fight and have intelligence(i use that term lightly) besides the goblins. Though we have to think of the rarity of these creatures

Trolls are significantly larger in numbers since they seem to turn up far more often in canon so could pose a problem to the muggles along the lines of a WWI/WWII era tank that has no guns(being knocked out by a 150 pound club falling 4 feet onto it's head makes that tank comment debatable).

Almost all other creatures mentioned up to this point have been wild animals incapable of being tamed or having the proper mental capacities to deicide as a population to goto war, if they are rounded up and put on the battlefield they would kill the wizards and muggles in equal amounts. So they will most likely go about their normal animal lives without the knowledge of a war and will run into the occasional muggle and animal control or the military will be called in to put it down (same as what would happen if it comes into contact with a wizard).

I purposely left out veela and werewolves since as far as we have seen they are capable of magic in the same way that normal wizards are but have slightly increased physical abilities.

Vampires -

I take that to mean that they are incapable of preforming magic in the way we see in canon. So a vampire is just a physically enhanced muggle with allergies to light(note: lexicon doesn't say anything about hp vampires and light/sun problems so that is just by the general knowledge of vampires).

Goblins - Goblins are the trump card of the magical community

The goblin wars were said to be "bloody and vicious" so it could be that the goblins in an all out no holding back would probably prove to be more of a challenge than the wizards. The problems I see are we know nothing of goblin magic or the armor that they wear.


So the main thing keeping the magical beings down besides sheer numbers and lack of long range or area attacks.

This was written on and off over a period of about 3 hours or so.

 

Just because a creature is magical is no reason to assume it is intelligent enough to be swayed by such things. Which side would a housecat take? Which side would an elephant take? Magical creatures might be magical, they might be dangerous but that doesn't mean that they're intelligent enough to listen to the facts and formulate an opinion; they're animals!

Because they don't have to. Ever heard the phrase, 'You're in no position to bargain.'? The vast majority of wizards have no idea how to control the dementors. The ones that do can't seem to keep them under that control, so that control is worthless. As for offering the dementors a better deal... That's like a mouse saying to a cat, "I'll make you a deal. You can eat all of the mice over there in that hole, as long as you leave me alone." Then the cat eats that mouse AND all the other ones. Why? Because you can only bargain if you have something the other party wants. The wizards don't have shit on dementors, so they're in no position to offer them anything. The dementors can take what they want, without so much as a 'by your leave' from the wizards.

Again, you're assuming that the dragons are intelligent enough to make such a decision. They aren't. These are not D&D dragons or any other talking, magic-using dragons that take human form and meddle in the affairs of mortals for a lark. They're just really dangerous animals. Like giant alligators that can fly and breath fire. Living dinosaurs. They aren't going to be swayed by any offers the wizards make because they are not smart enough to do so. If the wizards turn them loose to attack, they will kill whatever they choose, whether it's a muggle or a wizard. Try bargaining with an angry rhino sometime and let me know how that works out for you.

Firstly, the way most wizards treat house elves, they wouldn't ask them or make a deal with them, they'd just order them to fight. Secondly, I never said that the elves would defend their masters, only that they might and I made sure to mention that we can't take Dobby as proof that they would, since he is clearly unique among his kind. So 'my logic' was, perhaps, misinterpreted.

(Hope none of this is coming off as argumentative or overly aggressive. Hehe.)

I think that many people in the Middle East would argue that you do not need electricity to mount an effective insurgency.
On that note; I wonder how well off the wizards would be when muggles started aiming for their wands and Ollivander and the other prominent wandmakers have been assassinated. They're more reliant on their wands than we are on electricity.