If they sent the entier national guard to cities larger than 100,000 people, there would be ~1,200 troops per city. The conventional wisdom I have heard places the number of occupying troops to population required to suppress an insurgency at something like 20-25 troops per 1000 people. We’re at about half that number in the smallest cities larger than 100,000 in this hypothetical scenario. By those numbers, it would take the entier half national guard to secure NYC.
For comparison, Britain sent ~3,000 soldiers to Boston in 1768, which, at the time, had a population of about 16,000, and that basically only succeeded in turning the whole city into a preasure cooker.
This threat is a paper tiger even if we ignore the impossibility of the logistics.
If they sent the entier national guard to cities larger than 100,000 people, there would be ~1,200 troops per city. The conventional wisdom I have heard places the number of occupying troops to population required to suppress an insurgency at something like 20-25 troops per 1000 people. We’re at about half that number in the smallest cities larger than 100,000 in this hypothetical scenario. By those numbers, it would take the
entierhalf national guard to secure NYC.For comparison, Britain sent ~3,000 soldiers to Boston in 1768, which, at the time, had a population of about 16,000, and that basically only succeeded in turning the whole city into a preasure cooker.
This threat is a paper tiger even if we ignore the impossibility of the logistics.