NYT Discovers Federal Intervention Can Backfire, Sometimes
The Times notes how the deployment of federal agents, often in unmarked vehicles and without clear identification, inflamed tensions in Portland. This, of course, isn't unique to Trump's presidency, nor to domestic protests. Historically, escalating military presence in civilian areas—foreign or domestic—tends to breed resistance, not submission. One might recall the long history of 'peacekeeping'
interventions abroad leading to prolonged conflicts, not unlike the response to increased militarization in the West Bank by Israeli forces, which predictably fuels defiance. So, Washington sends paramilitary forces to 'restore order,' (a euphemism for suppressing dissent), and order collapses further. Who could have seen this coming? Perhaps everyone except the strategists who believe that
maximum force reliably yields maximum compliance. It merely proves that aggressive intervention often creates the very chaos it claims to be preventing, whether it's in Portland or Gaza.