[Steel Wolf]

What happened at Waco? Aside from the obvious "don't join a wackadoodle cult and get into a pointless gunfight and protracted seige with the feds", you mean? That's pretty much what happened at Waco. It's tragic (and, at best, criminally negligent) that women and children died there, but let's not romanticise what they died over.

That said, it's no great feat of arms to roll armored vehicles towards a cult compound and burn it to the ground. That sort of thing is pretty much what armored vehicles are built for. And it's a whole different ballgame than trying to occupy a 'friendly' town full of deer rifles on the roofs and handguns around every corner.

Just like in Iraq and Afghanistan, the military has great advantage while on the move, but is vulerable to being bled down once it has to hold territory. Combat arms units can do so effectively, provided they have a relaxed ROE. (Other units, like a finance or supply battalion, not so much.) Combat arms units are a drop in the bucket, compared to the scope of the country, and a relaxed ROE will cause a lot of YouTube worthy footage that won't help the government's cause.

The comparison to Waco really isn't apt on any level, aside from, at best, the government's willingness to use force.

[Chickensoup]

I may be wrong but I understood that the compound members never fired a shot.

[editor-surveyor]

There was no gun fight at Waco, it was simply an unlawful seige by Janet REno’s thugs, and only her thugs did any firing, this has been proven.

Jerks think that they can call anyone that they wish to marginalize a “wackadoodle cult,” but this is still a constitutional republic, and beliefs are to be respected.

Waco is the quintessential perfect comparison; much more so than Ruby Ridge was; that was done in secret for the most part.

You really did give yourself away on this.