> the "resistance" rings in MN are behaving like the insurgents the US has fought for decades in the Middle East

This is a horrifying and very unpariortic thing to say about people who are trying to prevent their daycares from being tear bombed, prevent masked thugs from beating detained law-abiding citizens before releasing them without charges, from masked thugs killing law-abiding people for exercising basic rights.

King George would have used that language. We sent him the Declaration of Independence, and the list of wrongs in that document is mostly relevant again today.

If you are framing this as insurgency, I place my bet on the strong people fighting bullets with mere whistles and cameras, as they are already coming out on top. If they ever resort to a fraction of the violence that the masked thugs are already using, they will not lose.

Yes because the US was famously the good guy in its forays into the middle east.

I love this example because it demonstrates like 5 different levels of ignorance about American politics and foreign relations, plus a good helping of propaganda.

You have an occupation force killing bystanders in your streets. Resistance is exactly what is needed.

> agreed to allow

pardon my ignorance, but why would that be up to your President?

Both can be true, but only one is.

Equating civil resistance, even in heated forms like disrupting raids or blocking roads, with decades‑long insurgencies that involved organized armed groups, territorial control, foreign combatants, and protracted guerrilla campaigns is like comparing a neighborhood disagreement over lawn care to Napoleon invading Russia.

They might not have the capacity to do more considering they still need to redact the rest of the epstein files that show their president is a child trafficking pedophile

[flagged]