I wrote an article on the 29th < This must stop… > condemning the violence, the attacks on law enforcement, the interference of ICE to do their job, the destruction, and the killings, etc. And apparently some folks didn’t like me calling for a stop to it. I find that odd, disturbingly so. I was calling for a stop to the violence and hatred. I said if it didn’t stop we might end up in a very dark and ugly place. I thought that was a reasonable call to action…stop the violence and hatred.
I received replies/comments from two folks, one of which I know, the other I don’t. It appears to me one is very radically on the pro-violence and far-right of the issue, clearly so. The other response was more of a sharing of another person’s opinion. I responded to their replies. After I did so I thought it through and I think we have hit political obstacle…maybe a dead end to this issue altogether. But for sure…an issue where few are willing to drop bias and change their minds or see reality for what it is vs perception.
So here is what I am going to do…I am going to make two separate posts regarding their views/comments and my replies. I think it prudent to share both sides, different views on this situation. But then I will call the issue closed. Why? Because it is more polarizing than any other issue that I have seen in a very long time. And should the polarization continue at this trajectory all that is needed would be an event, an incident, that would be the ignition point to a far darker time in America than any reasonable person wants.
This is the second in the posting of the feedback and replies. < click here to read the first “feedback” >
Posted by MamaGrizzly:
Eric Schwalm
“As a former Special Forces Warrant Officer with multiple rotations running counterinsurgency ops—both hunting insurgents and trying to separate them from sympathetic populations—I’ve seen organized resistance up close. From Anbar to Helmand, the pattern is familiar: spotters, cutouts, dead drops (or modern equivalents), disciplined comms, role specialization, and a willingness to absorb casualties while bleeding the stronger force slowly.
What’s unfolding in Minneapolis right now isn’t “protest.” It’s low-level insurgency infrastructure, built by people who’ve clearly studied the playbook.
Signal groups at 1,000-member cap per zone. Dedicated roles: mobile chasers, plate checkers logging vehicle data into shared databases, 24/7 dispatch nodes vectoring assets, SALUTE-style reporting (Size, Activity, Location, Unit, Time, Equipment) on suspected federal vehicles. Daily chat rotations and timed deletions to frustrate forensic recovery. Vetting processes for new joiners. Mutual aid from sympathetic locals (teachers providing cover, possible PD tip-offs on license plate lookups). Home-base coordination points. Rapid escalation from observation to physical obstruction—or worse.
This isn’t spontaneous outrage. This is C2 (command and control) with redundancy, OPSEC hygiene, and task organization that would make a SF team sergeant nod in recognition. Replace “ICE agents” with “occupying coalition forces” and the structure maps almost 1:1 to early-stage urban cells we hunted in the mid-2000s.
The most sobering part? It’s domestic. Funded, trained (somewhere), and directed by people who live in the same country they’re trying to paralyze law enforcement in. When your own citizens build and operate this level of parallel intelligence and rapid-response network against federal officers—complete with doxxing, vehicle pursuits, and harassment that’s already turned lethal—you’re no longer dealing with civil disobedience. You’re facing a distributed resistance that’s learned the lessons of successful insurgencies: stay below the kinetic threshold most of the time, force over-reaction when possible, maintain popular support through narrative, and never present a single center of gravity.
I spent years training partner forces to dismantle exactly this kind of apparatus. Now pieces of it are standing up in American cities, enabled by elements of local government and civil society. That should keep every thinking American awake at night.
Not because I want escalation. But because history shows these things don’t de-escalate on their own once the infrastructure exists and the cadre believe they’re winning the information war.
We either recognize what we’re actually looking at—or we pretend it’s still just “activism” until the structures harden and spread.
Your call, America. But from where I sit, this isn’t January 2026 politics anymore. It’s phase one of something we’ve spent decades trying to keep off our own soil.
My reply:
Interesting…couple thoughts regarding this man’s opinion piece:
#1 – I looked into Eric Schwalm (claiming Retired Green Beret (CW4)) and I found this: “A post attributed to “Eric Schwalm” on the social platform captured in the reporting explicitly identifies the poster as “a former Special Forces Warrant Officer with multiple rotations running counterinsurgency ops” and applies that experience to analyze unrest in Minneapolis, describing patterns the author says mirror Anbar and Helmand operations. That text is a primary source for the claim but, within the set of documents provided for this analysis, stands alone — there is no accompanying military service record, biography, or official confirmation attached to the account in these materials.”
I could find nothing that confirmed that Schwalm was who he says he is. The only Eric Schwalm came back as an employee at a consulting firm at Bain & Company. With no military service record. Eric Schwalm may be who he says he is but no one online could confirm he is who he says he is.
I did find a person using his name on “X”. Nothing on his account confirmed who he says he is, but he claims SOF and military background. I read a bunch of his posts…whoa. This guy is seriously jacked on violence. He is gun-ho about everything military…except when he is criticizing all the military bigwigs who don’t like Trump…then it is a conspiracy. But again, I can find nothing online that confirms who he claims to be.
#2 – This article only represents what his opinion is…nothing more. I’ve read multiple articles and watched multiple videos lately of veterans who have condemned DHS & ICE and the broader Trump administration on their tactics. So who do you want to listen to and who do you want to believe? It is all opinion…on both sides of the issue…our choice.
#3 – There have been multiple former ICE agents and former DHS employees who have criticized what is going on currently in MN. An FBI agent resigned in protest over the FBI investigation handling of the shooting of Renee Good. So do we believe them since they have far more experience and credibility regarding MN than a vet who is not involved in MN, has no training as an FBI agent, has no training or experience as ICE or DHS, and has no experience with civilians in the US?
#4 – I don’t know about anyone else but I don’t need to have someone I don’t know tell me what I should think about ICE & MN. Especially people who are not using the actual definition of “insurgency” and other terms or even actual facts. I believe what I believe based on my own research and my own viewing and my own analysis of video…and listening to those folks whom I trust. I for sure put zero credibility in people’s version of events when they are on either the radical left or radical right. Yeah, basically meaning I can think for myself using valid and reliable information and evidence.
#5 – Confirmation bias is a damning thing. But in all things political now it seems to rule the day…unfortunately. That is why I am not part of the right nor part of the left…I will look at individual issues and make my opinion based on what I figure out…not on political ideology or bias. And I try very hard to temper all of my opinions with Christ’s teachings.
#6 – Back during my Vietnam War era days when I was in the military handling classified intelligence I remember the group called “Vietnam Veterans Against the War”. Republicans hated them, “patriots” despised them, most of the public thought they were cowards and pinkos. Yeah, problem…they were right…so were all the other protestors who were against the war. A lot of the those protestors were killed for standing up for what they believed…including May 1970 when there were 13 casualties, all kids, shot by National Guard troops at Kent State. It took a couple of decades but it turned out all those protestors were right…the Vietnam War was wrong…and almost 60,000 military lives were wasted. So just because a group protests doesn’t mean they are wrong in their message just because they are protesting, even destructively so.
#7 – Of course there are organizers behind the MN demonstrations, protests, and the attacks on law enforcement that I’ve pointed out was so wrong. Does it make all those organizers wrong or terrorists? No, of course not…to think they are is absurd. Do some of them have evil intents, of course. Are some of them revolutionaries? Maybe. So remember this if you want to brand all these folks terrorist or insurgents…no federal law enforcement person has been seriously injured and none killed. But ICE and DHS can’t say the same about the other side.
#8 – Is this just “activism”? No, of course not. But many of these folks are just that, a few aren’t. It is the few that have evil intent that we should be concerned about…and their handlers. Should we be killing people that are absolutely no imminent threat (which is the legal standard)? No reasonable person, no sane person, especially no Christian wants to see people killed in America like this…none! Multiple video versions of both killings show, clearly show, that neither posed a threat, let alone an imminent threat. Who in their right mind wants to see people killed during a demonstration or protest? What decent person is okay with, or celebrates, such deaths?
#9 – Thank you Eric Schwalm for sharing your opinion. It was enlightening. Based on who you say you are, I struggle to give much credence on your views, or credibility on your interpretation of events and people. Based on both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars…they were a complete waste of time, killed far too many military personnel, and squandered massive amounts of money. We destroyed two countries and killed a million people for nothing…and we lost both wars while we did so. Based on your online posts representing your views…you are very radically right-wing and in love with all things military and violence. IMO…you do not represent the political ground that would be conducive to my view of our Founding Fathers. Your views appear to more appropriately match those of the British Empire who wanted to crush the colonial insurrectionists and violently subjugate them to the will of the King.
#10 – Emotions are running very high…absurdly so…on both sides. Both sides want to blame the other…one side is fine with killing, the other wants to kill. Both sides are wrong. The violence is wrong! The US is being manipulated into civil war by all those behind the curtain…on both sides. That is what they want…to have us tear each other apart. And so many people are playing right into their hands. Bias and blindness will lead us into that civil war.
Turn our hearts to Christ…and then pray. I will it again…the violence on both sides must stop!
AH
Related Articles –
As if that isn’t good enough…Trump then posts a picture of himself as Jesus Christ. That would be, should be, insulting to another 1 BILLION Christians.
Intentionally starting a religious war? Nah, I don’t think so. I just think Trump has become “Delusional Donald” like Russ suggested.
