Unfortunately, I fear that that the first 3 options would lead to something similar to a Waco-ATF incident. Civilians simply cannot surmount a force that has permission to use modern military equipment against the populace. It would be far more likely that the city would be burned to the ground, and each “law enforcer” would be acquitted in a federal court.
I do believe there is a possibility that a hostile public would make things difficult for ICE, but realistically protected emigration would be the most successful solution. Even though I dont want to leave California, I may have to emigrate with the others to stay alive.
It’s not like they would have to win pitched battles with the military. If one ICE agent was shot every few days somewhere, it might become hard to recruit.
I bet that ICE are inherently cowards. Racists can’t take the heat, because their whole ideology is rooted in fear of the minority doing…something, anything, really.
I don’t think they are active equivalents. Unlike that situation, this is home field for both sides - with key infrastructure and intelligence data held extensively by the aggressor. The populace is not motivated or unified in ways that a populace defending against a foreign invader would.
While the technological gap may be somewhat different, the ability to conceal equipment is very limited by the defenders. It is unlikely that the aggressors would “withdraw” from the area as well, since their command would not tolerate losing a key economic and strategic location for the US (California has numerous military installations and production facilities). It is far more likely that ICE/Federal forces would double down.
Granted, this is from my perspective as an engineer who is trained in analyzing problems through a systems and logistics mindset. I don’t know how passion or the human psyche would play into this.
I still believe these are not apt comparisons though.
Unfortunately, I fear that that the first 3 options would lead to something similar to a Waco-ATF incident. Civilians simply cannot surmount a force that has permission to use modern military equipment against the populace. It would be far more likely that the city would be burned to the ground, and each “law enforcer” would be acquitted in a federal court.
I do believe there is a possibility that a hostile public would make things difficult for ICE, but realistically protected emigration would be the most successful solution. Even though I dont want to leave California, I may have to emigrate with the others to stay alive.
It’s not like they would have to win pitched battles with the military. If one ICE agent was shot every few days somewhere, it might become hard to recruit.
I bet that ICE are inherently cowards. Racists can’t take the heat, because their whole ideology is rooted in fear of the minority doing…something, anything, really.
I heard someone reply to that argument once with, “ask The Taliban”. I’m not sure I agree. But it did make me think.
I don’t think they are active equivalents. Unlike that situation, this is home field for both sides - with key infrastructure and intelligence data held extensively by the aggressor. The populace is not motivated or unified in ways that a populace defending against a foreign invader would.
While the technological gap may be somewhat different, the ability to conceal equipment is very limited by the defenders. It is unlikely that the aggressors would “withdraw” from the area as well, since their command would not tolerate losing a key economic and strategic location for the US (California has numerous military installations and production facilities). It is far more likely that ICE/Federal forces would double down.
Granted, this is from my perspective as an engineer who is trained in analyzing problems through a systems and logistics mindset. I don’t know how passion or the human psyche would play into this.
I still believe these are not apt comparisons though.