Firstly I tend to disagree with the comments by the servicemen/ex-servicemen that say armed civilians in the West would be a joke against modern military units.

But I also agree somewhat. I am not military trained or experienced. Don't pretend to be any sort of TV armchair expert.

First it is complete rubbish to say all countries ultimately are ruled by the majority. The world and history proves exactly the opposite.

It is also rubbish to say a determined force or rebels always wins in the long run.

I would argue that first they only win when it is an invading force, which can go elsewhere. Home grown dictators and their minions can't go "back home with their tails between their legs".

Secondly hoime grown disorganised chaotic rebels by themselves rarely achieve anything but chaos. Unless they are backed by substantial resources, usually a foreign power. Over many many years sometimes, but as soon as the foreign power stops support, they disappear or give up.

Examples are the IRA in Ireland. Supported by the Soviet Union. When the Iron Curtain fell, the agreed to peace soon after. I wonder who is supporting and funding the new troubles there with the "New IRA" since the Brexit vote?

Another example is the Basque mov't. Again supported by the Soviet Union.

Another example of course if the Palestinians. A mixture of different scenarios there.

Armed guerillas did not win in Rhodesia. Foreign sanctions eventually forced change there.

Armed guerillas did not change South Africa. Political action and sanctions did.

Armed guerillas did not win in Vietnam. North Vietnamese army was ALWAYS behind the Viet Cong. The Viet Cong largely was imaginery and always North soldiers.

Guerillas did not win in Angola. They lost.

Interestingly guerillas did win in Malawi. I wonder who was supporting them? The USA covertly? The French supported the genocidial Malawui gov't.

The French Resistance. Caused some havoc. In no way would have "won the war" in France. The D-Day Invasion changed the tide. As everyone knows.

Resistance in the Low Countries, would not have won.

Partisans in Eastern Europe achieved some results. But did not "win". The invading Red Army was the deciding factor.

AND ALL of these resistance groups had foreign support, arm supplies, training facilities, either by the British and Americans in the West or the Russians and Allies in the East. And in modern times, the Afghans by the USA, all the marxist revolutionaries by the Soviet Union.

Something controversial. ISIS guerillas were supported by Saudis and probably the CIA.

Rsistance movements rarely win unless supported by foreign powers, with arms and money, or at least by very rich supporters. And still usually a foreign powers direct intervention militarily or economically is also needed to "win".

***

Hunters being better than soldiers?

No kidding. Often the case except for some soldiers.

War isn't about one on one. They don't fight with swords on horseback now. It is about logictics, units, groups and strategy.

For example, guerillas can damage a police station. Police can raid their houses at 4am and arrest them one by one.

Guerillas can hide in a friendly population.

I wonder how electronic surveillance would change this in the modern world. Tap into phones, your smart mobile phone, google home devices, your laptops camera and microphone, your smart TV ... there was a reason Osama Bin Ladin hid in caves or allegedly disconnect houses with any human intermediaries.

I wonder how effective hiding in the bush and mountains is nowadays? No Himalayas or Hindu Kush to hide in. Satellites, aircraft, drones, all make a difference now.

A mention earlier, authorities couldn't use a lot of larger weapons because of harming non combatants? Dictators often have no concerns like this. And the rebels often hope for large civilian deaths as this motivates the middle people to get angry.

Electronic surveillance and noght vision. One of the advantages troops had in Iraq and the Middle East was electronic surveillance and night vision. The jihardis did not. Were at a massive disadvantage at night.

Does every AR15 freedom fight also have night vision goggles?

Massive air power wins wars when backed up by ground forces.

Artillery was the winning strategic factor before airpower existed.

***

NOW I would bloody well hope that the US military would NOT support such a dictator. At least not a left wing dictator. Even given the attempts to undermine the military in a lot of our countries with gender identity politics and rot.

Almost all the military people I know, tend to be of a certain character. Law abiding, but also with a certain amount of independence and free spirit. Police on the other hand can be very different.

***

How does a coup happen?

Traditionally was the seizing of the Town Hall, Parliament, Presidencial Palace, the TV station, the radio station, the Police HQ, military bases not part of the coup.

Nowadays they can probably turn off the internet ... ? ... seeing how it happened in Sri Lanka and NZ.

But I really dounbt some sort of sudden tanks in the street sort of thing. More like the current "death by a thousand cuts". Democracy ends not with a bang, it ends with a whimper. And history shows, an emergency is engineered, and then an emergency response is called for, and draconian controls are required ...

***

There is a very real reason why the anti gunners want to remove lots of firearms and certain types of firearms from the hand of American civilians. Because millions of firearms in millions of civilians hands are an impediment.

Even if laws came in today, how on Earth would that change anything. Registration AFTER the acquisition does not necessarily lead to future successful confiscation.

***

But when it comes to the question of the Red or Blue Pill, I do feel most people will almost certainly choose the Blue Pill.