By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Since January 6, approximately 2,000 ICE agents have been deployed to Minnesota, allegedly for a fraud investigation, but are instead engaging in excessive force and illegal actions, prompting a federal judge to attempt limitations. These actions, including shootings, tear gassing, and family separations, have led to investigations targeting state officials and the widow of a victim while ICE escalates its conduct. With the National Guard on standby and the potential invocation of the Insurrection Act, the situation resembles a scenario previously explored, raising concerns about a violent confrontation between state and federal forces. The legalities of such deployments are discussed, emphasizing the military’s obligation to refuse illegal orders.
Read the original article here
We ran high-level US civil war simulations, and the results pointed to a chilling reality: Minnesota is exactly how such a conflict could ignite. The simulations, conducted by former military and government officials, weren’t viewed as far-fetched, especially given the current political climate and potential legal loopholes, such as the implications of criminal immunity for presidential actions. The simulations highlighted a concerning scenario: the potential for federal troops to be deployed against both state National Guard units and unarmed civilians, raising questions about the legality of such actions and the military’s adherence to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, especially concerning the Rules for the Use of Force.
The simulations exposed potential weaknesses in our system, suggesting that in a crisis, the courts might be unable or unwilling to intervene effectively. This leaves state officials without judicial recourse, potentially escalating tensions. The possibility of senior military leaders being pressured to use force against their own citizens is a significant concern. The scenario considered how the Insurrection Act could be applied, highlighting the crucial need for military leaders to assess the legality of any orders they receive.
The simulations also underscored a sense of urgency, with the warning that the collapse of a system, like the former Soviet Union, can happen suddenly. This echoes the sentiment that the current situation may be more precarious than it appears. The simulations touched on the potential for green-on-green violence, a term that refers to conflict between forces within the same country, potentially pitting state National Guard against federal troops or even civilians.
The anxieties expressed by many are palpable. There’s a deep-seated fear of government overreach and the potential for wrongful detention. The simulations seemingly support the idea that an attack by an organized resistance, real or perceived, could be used to justify increased government oppression. The underlying fear is that those in power may exploit a manufactured crisis to maintain or expand their control. This concern is further fueled by actions already seen in cities, such as the use of federal agents, mirroring the simulations’ forecasts.
Many see the current political climate as a powder keg. There is a palpable sense that we are teetering on the edge of something far more significant, potentially mirroring historical events like the Spanish Civil War. The potential for the US to collapse is a real and present fear for many, who see our nation at a critical moment in history. The simulations appear to confirm this feeling, showing how various factors, from political maneuvering to legal actions, might lead to a catastrophic outcome.
The simulations also explored the role of misinformation and propaganda in a potential conflict. They touched on the idea that the “enemy” would actively try to provoke a reaction. The need for restraint, for remaining as peaceful as possible, is often stressed. The goal of those in power, according to some, is to incite an overreaction, which could lead to violent escalation.
The simulations also address the increasing presence of ICE facilities, the idea that they are building concentration camps. It is worth noting that some municipal governments are actively resisting these plans, further exacerbating tensions. There is a sense that the current administration is purposefully setting the stage for a conflict, using various entities like ICE as tools. This reinforces the idea that an organized resistance is needed to prevent an all-out civil war.
The idea that the civil war, or a claim of civil war, is coming is already out there. The simulations likely accounted for the potential for state National Guard units to remain loyal to their states, an element that could complicate any federal intervention. The simulations may have also predicted that military and National Guard troops, already leaning right-wing, might side with the federal government. The fact that the simulations could have been prompted by AI is also a consideration.
The simulations didn’t just focus on the military and political aspects. The economic repercussions, the possibility of a general strike, were also likely considered. The potential for foreign powers to involve themselves may have also been a point of discussion. The simulations were designed to explore a wide range of scenarios, from legal maneuvers to civil disobedience to armed conflict.
Ultimately, the simulations paint a grim picture, suggesting that the path to civil conflict is paved with political polarization, erosion of trust in institutions, and a willingness by some to exploit any situation for their advantage. The emphasis on Minnesota isn’t about the state itself, but rather that the dynamics and events playing out there are those that can start a country’s collapse.