You think a bunch of low iq, bitch made dudes that can't survive and are forced to attack are gonna an insurgent esqe issue?

lol

How many roof top koreans did it take to repel hundreds of abled bodied looters?

Like 5?

I hope people try that at night when they can’t see the cameras recording them.

Don't strike against the tip of the spear, strike against the hands wielding it.

ETA: I see someone beat me to that quote, dupetastic.

I was thinking more about the joint counter-IED and insurgent cell networks in Iraq in 2007.

There is some good material on it out there.

It would be the same here, as long as the local LEOs or National Guard/Air National Guard units used the same or better platforms.

Combined with cyber, it would be brutal for a wannabe resistance movement, unless you don't have a cyber profile.

People are talking about using Infantry Squad organization in this thread, including the title, combined with ambush and harassment missions.

If that does't bring on the Governor, National Guard, and Air National Guard, I don't know what will.

They don't have joint systems, including aerial platform surveillance feed overlaid with other systems in the area.

The moment you launch ambushes and harassment missions against local LE, you're going to get some attention from higher level resources than the local sheriffs.

Like I said, give me some appropriate HUMINT and PSYOP assets in the area, and I can defeat whatever jack-booted thuggery the citizens are complaining about in short order.

Think about Washington's intel cells against the British, not German mercenaries teaching close order drill.

I think the disconnect here is the assumption on the part of some, especially those speaking out against it, that said rifle squad organization, and its potential ambush or harassment missions, wouldn't be under direction of the Governor, officers of the National Guard, or other competent governing authority.  I never suggested in the OP, nor did Sylvan in the post you quoted, that the militia in question is some rogue organization.  While some are trying to steer the thread in that direction- the intent was to suggest, as stated in the OP, that to revitalize the militia system we need to redefine how it must operate in 21st century warfare at a very basic level.

The law in many more states than not allows for the governor to conscript residents of the state for militia service.  Most states simply have let the system fall by the way side- in some states, such as Idaho and Montana for example, you are required as a male to be enrolled in the militia or pay a fine to the county wherein you reside.  They simply haven't enforced it since WWII.  If the states ever wish to maintain the shreds of sovereignty they have left, or ever hope to push back and retake the authorities they have under the tenth amendment (and thereby exist as free and independent states that exist as part of a federal system), they MUST revitalize the militia system.  It gives the states the implicit threat of force, which is why the federal government has worked so hard to ensure that even the Guard has drifted farther and farther into the federal domain. While it is highly unlikely state militias could win a war on their own, they don't need to.  The can serve as defense for critical infrastructure, help support planned or pitched defense of a community, and augment the "regular" (National Guard) forces of the individual states.

Or use a cyber profile to intentionally spread mis/disinfo.

I sure as heck wouldn’t do that. I wouldn’t know.

What seems to have derailed this thread is the disconnect between the OP asking specifically about "how to set up a militia rifle squad" but people mostly arguing about the bigger-picture questions of "does the militia need rifle squads" (and ultimately "what is a militia for and how should it be structured and used").

Starting with the militia's purpose/mission, how about "to protect their fellow citizens against enemies foreign and domestic, and to preserve or restore the Constitutional order of our Republic"?

However, in order to show presence and demonstrate utility in "peacetime", as well as for team building and training purposes, the militia could as well help with traffic control, search & rescue, emergency preparedness training for citizens, etc. etc. (understanding that these activities should not detract from preparing for their primary mission, and also understanding that those who are "out and proud" about being in their local militia will likely be among the first to be rolled up should TSHTF - so maybe in addition to the "official/open" militia there should also be a clandestine organization? But, during peacetime, that would probably draw a lot of attention from the powers-that-be, and may even be illegal in some states.)

In any case, that means "the militia" as a whole (and, ideally, every single squad/cell) needs to be able to cover missions on a spectrum from traffic control to search & rescue to intelligence gathering and analysis to propaganda to ambushes to raids on high-value targets to ... (depending on personnel, training and equipment), all in a decentralized, self-sustaining and potentially clandestine operational context. Thus, as someone else mentioned, for a "generic" militia cell/squad, the SF A-Team model is probably more appropriate as a building block than an infantry rifle squad. But hey, the OP wanted to hear about rifle squads

But the A-Team model also illustrates the challenge of finding the right people for it - "a hundred men we'll test today..."