Crazy Eddie wrote:
given my enlisted service in the United States Army in both the infantry and air defense branches and my time as a commissioned officer in military intelligence, i do feel that I have workable understanding of what the term invasion means.
Then you're perfectly aware as I am that the opposition of an invasion force would -- and in many cases DOES -- involve both the full force of the nation's regular military and anyone else who can carry a weapon, yes? Primarily because the need to oppose an immanent invasion far outstrips the need to distinguish between military forces and non-military police forces.
Overall, the designation of a nation's military is based on the need to define a formal fighting force. If there is no need for such a force, they won't designate one.
umm, no. The idea that armed civilians or police forces could blunt or repel any type of assault by combat regulars is sheer lunacy and would only lead to a slaughter of such forces. you obviously have no idea of the kind of firepower that even a single infantry platoon possesses. the only chance a militia would have is to hunker down until combat operations had passed and use guerrilla tactics against softer rear echelon targets. but by then most cities would be occupied and police departments unarmed except for minimum firepower necessary to keep the peace.
the last thing you would want is civilians firing on the enemy leading to frontline operational units indiscriminately firing on unarmed civilians and evacuating refugees.
this isn't the Civil War. clearly you're not familiar with the lethality of modern militaries. you might as well send 5 year olds out there onto the battlefield strapped with claymores on their chests because your idea of total war is going to be a bloodbath.
in other words, no matter how many times you've watched Red Dawn you need to leave the fighting to the professionals. just like the Federation leaves it to Starfleet, their military.