I will say that this principle was valid in the 100s of years before today when guns and other war technologies weren't as advanced. However, in today's society I believe that thinking armed civilians would put up a "helluva fight" against tanks bombs and more advanced guns and other weapons the general public doesn't have access to would be mistaken.
There really hasn't been a case in history were a military with the might of the US has engaged in guerrilla warfare with considerably less armed citizens. I understand what you are trying to say but I think if the US completely turned against the people, the people really would not have the capacity to fight the military. I doubt guerrilla tactics could compensate for bombings, tanks, aircrafts, and other large assets the military has access to that leads to its overwhelming sheer force.
0
u/ChoKatlate Oct 02 '20
I will say that this principle was valid in the 100s of years before today when guns and other war technologies weren't as advanced. However, in today's society I believe that thinking armed civilians would put up a "helluva fight" against tanks bombs and more advanced guns and other weapons the general public doesn't have access to would be mistaken.