> Right. US military have trained heavily for this scenario, however.
So? That can actually play to your advantage. With heavy training, comes
assumptions of what to expect, and an ingrained game-plan. If you know
what they expect, you simply do something else, and cause confusion.
> Well, too weak or not, far too few of them want freedom badly enough.
Yeah, the conditions for real insurrection are rare, and tends to involve
a great deal of suffering. As a tyrannt, if you can keep the population
fat, and entertained, you'll be alright.
> That does seem to be a favorite tactic. But even if you take down the
> national government, it's police forces and National Guard units that
> would become feudal overlords. So armed insurrection seems pointless.
Nah, you're looking at it in a vacuum. If the conditions are right to get
a large enough force together to do something like that, there is enough
social support to get a majority on board.
Read, or review, Che Guevara's work "Guerrilla Warfare" .. he makes a
pretty compelling case for the types of conditions that need to be met in
order to have an effective insurrection.
>> If this is true, its a serious indication that the United States
>> government is greatly weakening. Considering its importance to the west,
>> generally, its good news all around.
> Wishful thinking.
OK, so you made me go digging this up.
Federal agents has firearms pointed at them, and stood down. DHS
subsequently predicted a rise in anti-government and anti-police activity
as a result. They were right about that, it would seem.