The point is this: A threat indicates a line not to be crossed. It goes both ways, so when you make the threat you should be prepared.
This is what the 2nd was for. Most of us are afraid for the consequences.
Those who compromise hate this country as much as the left. When your opponent knows you hate violence and do pretty much anything to avoid it, they become a madness. When you refuse to even talk about what is "too far" or "no go," they become the sickness.
At what point is our self-restraint in the face of the consequences going to evolve for lack of remedy into the time when evil is called good and good evil? Maybe, we're there already.
Finally, ask yourselves, why does the parent know they are right in the face of an adamantly obstinate child?
Proverbs 13:24 - He who spares his rod hates his son, But he who loves him disciplines him promptly.
Ecclesiastes 8:11 - Because the sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.
With what army? They will have lost a ton of soldiers to the new country. Also, I'm not talking piecemeal here. It has to be done as a coalition.
Additionally, the people in this thread, including the OP, is talking about fighting a war anyway so why not try the peaceful route first? Then if they want to fight a war, then we'll be fighting them and beating them legally. They can't arrest anyone for shooting back at that point. Our new country will just say, "Do whatever you need to defend OUR country."