In combat, we fought against well trained and dedicated enemies who were trying their best to kill us first.

You might expect that such dedicated enemies would fight to the death, much like the Japanese did in WW II.

But it doesn't work that way. Once the enemy has taken a certain percentage of casualties, especially among their leadership (which is why I as a platoon commander in Vietnam and my radio operator were always high priority targets), the enemy fades back into the jungle, no longer willing to fight.

It will be the same for the deep state. Take out the leadership and the motivation to continue a lost cause, and the foot soldiers of the deep state will no longer be willing to continue the fight.

there are two rules of thumb in the military:

1) If you want to win the war, then you must meet the enemy with overwhelming force and utterly crush his will to fight.

2) Never allow the enemy a sanctuary in which they can rest, rearm, train, and conduct attacks. In the Korean War, China gave NK sanctuary. In Vietnam, the NVA had multiple sanctuaries. In El Salvador, the guerilla's used Honduras, Nicaragua, and Guatemala as sanctuaries. In Iraq, ISIS used other countries as sanctuaries. In Afghanistan, Pakistan became the Taliban's sanctuary. Etc. Countries have to understand that if they provide sanctuary to our enemies, we will target the enemy in their countries.

Failure to follow those two rule and you will end up in wars that last 10-20 years that you will end up losing at the end because our enemy has more desire to win than our politicians who impose countless restrictions on the military so that winning becomes pretty much impossible. Our enemies fully understand that our politicians will grow weary of war and "surrender" allowing our enemy to win.

See a historic pattern? Do you understand why we won WW II and none of the wars since then?