I've been grappling with this a lot over the past several days.

I think there is some MAJOR miscommunication and poor articulation of the reality.

"In other words, the illegitimate government has to be in power for a year before the Military can lawfully remove them."

See? That just makes no sense whatsoever. (moreover, I am still looking for how and why the actual texts are being interpreted as 1 year).

However, let's reframe this:

1. Agents acting on behalf of and at the behest of a foreign power undermined a nation's election. That's an act of war, if it removes the legitimate government.

2. Those agents are thus "enemies" and now control the nation's govt. However, they have NOT declared themselves as "enemies" and are pretending to still serve their nation, instead of a foreign power that is at war with the nation. Thus, they are in the position of "spies".

3. In the Law of War, (and Geneva Convention?) there are internationally agreed upon rules about when a nation's military can attack or go against its OWN people or OWN government, without being held accountable for war crimes.

(i.e. a military acting on home soil (*not in enemy territory) to oust its own government might be open to international war law violations)

4. (This is where I still cannot find the link, but) the assertion is that the agents who are in fact foreign belligerents (they serve the enemy power) must make themselves known as such agents in order to NOT be spies and not be treated as "unprivileged belligerent combatants). Apparently, according to LoW or GC, they have one year period to do this.

5. After one year, the GC stipulations that a military cannot act against its OWN people on home territory no longer pertain after a 12 month period of occupation, from the time hostilities cease.

6. The idea here is that the White Hats can act against the foreign agents (Biden, et al) without any fear of reprisals under intl law regarding warfare and warcrimes, once that one year period is up.

They COULD act earlier, but under the GC (apparently) they would be open to accusation of war crimes for acting on home soil against their OWN govt and people.

In other words, until its clear that the Black hats are agents for CCP etc, then any action by the WHite hats may contravene international law regarding how and in what way war can be justified.

That's what I understand so far.

WHY there is this one year period no one has been able to show me yet. (Where in the GC does it say this? or in Law of War manual it says this? No one has pointed it out yet. all the LoW says is "the application of the GC shall cease ONE YEAR after cease of hostilities"

Still looking into it, but if it Does make sense, I think they way some people phrase it or explain it confuses the real issues.

The assertion is, military cannot simply conduct war without a certain properly recognized legitimate basis, and that basis cannot be established while the (secret) agents are still pretending to be good guys.

I've been grappling with this a lot over the past several days.

I think there is some MAJOR miscommunication and poor articulation of the reality.

"In other words, the illegitimate government has to be in power for a year before the Military can lawfully remove them."

See? That just makes no sense whatsoever. (moreover, I am still looking for how and why the actual tests are being interpreted as 1 year).

However, let's reframe this:

1. Agents acting on behalf of and at the behest of a foreign power undermined a nation's election. That's an act of war, if it removes the legitimate government.

2. Those agents are thus "enemies" and now control the nation's govt. However, they have NOT declared themselves as "enemies" and are pretending to still serve their nation, instead of a foreign power that is at war with the nation. Thus, they are in the position of "spies".

3. In the Law of War, (and Geneva Convention?) there are internationally agreed upon rules about when a nation's military can attack or go against its OWN people or OWN government, without being held accountable for war crimes.

(i.e. a military acting on home soil (*not in enemy territory) to oust its own government might be open to international war law violations)

4. (This is where I still cannot find the link, but) the assertion is that the agents who are in fact foreign belligerents (they serve the enemy power) must make themselves known as such agents in order to NOT be spies and not be treated as "unprivileged belligerent combatants). Apparently, according to LoW or GC, they have one year period to do this.

5. After one year, the GC stipulations that a military cannot act against its OWN people on home territory no longer pertain after a 12 month period of occupation, from the time hostilities cease.

6. The idea here is that the White Hats can act against the foreign agents (Biden, et al) without any fear of reprisals under intl law regarding warfare and warcrimes, once that one year period is up.

They COULD act earlier, but under the GC (apparently) they would be open to accusation of war crimes for acting on home soil against their OWN govt and people.

In other words, until its clear that the Black hats are agents for CCP etc, then any action by the WHite hats may contravene international law regarding how and in what way war can be justified.

That's what I understand so far.

WHY there is this one year period no one has been able to show me yet. (Where in the GC does it say this? or in Law of War manual it says this? No one has pointed it out yet. all the LoW says is "the application of the GC shall cease ONE YEAR after cease of hostilities"

Still looking into it, but if it Does make sense, I think they way some people phrase it or explain it confuses the real issues.

The assertion is, military cannot simply conduct war without a certain properly recognized legitimate basis, and that basis cannot be established while the (secret) agents are still pretending to be good guys.