Guerilla warfare? I don't think so.
The tyrant has another option, a ready, high-tech arsenal. And, for the very reasons you cite, he would use it.
Indeed, that he COULD use it is sufficient reason to call the matchup lopsided and the 2nd amendment emasculated.
I'm just checking back in for a moment to let you both know that I have read your responses and will reply to them later this evening. Unfortunately, through the week-end and today the press of time and responsibilities wouldn't allow a more timely response. Thank you for your patience.
How well did technology work against guerilla tactics in Veitnam, my dear?
The entire point of guerilla warfare is to turn the enemy's advantages into disavantages. Do you think that enterprising and highly-motivated American hunters, most of whom have some military training or experience, would be incapable of thinking of ways to do that? I respectfully assert that you are incorrect on that matter.
The Iraqi insurgents are doing an exquisite job of doing so. Our strength, politics, and tech all mean that we can be very careful about civlian casualties and destroying important buildings... and thus they hide among innocents and in "important" mosques.
The tyrant has another option, a ready, high-tech arsenal. And, for the very reasons you cite, he would use it.
True, he could order it... but how many US soldiers would carry out orders to use such weapons on American citizens? Some, surely, but not all. And, once again, they'd be spending far more expensive ordinance than necessary or feasible... the old "missile for a camel's tent" problem. Our "troops" wouldn't mass. Our strength would be solo work and small concentrations in important areas. With only 1 million troops (tops) to ferret out 100,000,000 "snipers", one at a time, it puts the tyrant in an untenable position. Lobbing missiles at individual locations just wastes missiles. The US doesn't HAVE 100,000,000 missiles to lob at people, even if they could find the soldiers willing to pull the trigger.
Indeed, that he COULD use it is sufficient reason to call the matchup lopsided and the 2nd amendment emasculated.
Again, I completely disagree. Unless you're talking nukes, they cannot destroy us all. (IF they use nukes, then there's nothing left to rule anyway, so why bother worrying about it? If we confront THAT kind of tyrant, it's all over for the nation as an entity. That government would never rule, because it would have nothing to rule.)
Again, anything they use can be countered or minimized with intelligence, tactics, and willpower.