IMVHO you see the issue from a too strict POV: why countries goes to war? Definitively not because of ideology, of course they use ideology to train their own s

IMVHO you see the issue from a too strict POV: why countries goes to war? Definitively not because of ideology, of course they use ideology to train their own soldiers, they use propaganda on both sides from equal reasons, but the real reasons behind a war are more practical: countries goes to war to conquer someone else resources they need or to protect their own. Guerrilla warfare do work only on ground, not for an invasion, at least, in case of an invasion guerrilla must be "domestic, on the enemy ground", so if a country train it's citizen to guerrilla at maximum teach other countries citizens how to protect their own land. Unless that country do not need/want in the future invade/steal from someone else there is nothing harmful in that knowledge spread. IRA itself formally and substantially act in Ireland against the British who invaded them first, their "Irish" descendants of the North later, they do not invaded UK, USA, or any other country, if they have made attacks outside Ireland they are just hyper-rare cases. ISIS... Well... IMVHO ISIS is a byproduct of USA intelligence, not joking, no "conspiracy theory", simply for their own interest USA went abroad they have established or make arrangement with local regimes and for a certain period of time that work. After those dictatorships get a bit more power to aspire to being independent. So the USA need a way to overthrow these governments, they can't act directly, USA population would never approve such actions, like most of the world population, so they need something else: they arm and train local criminals, some idealists, some desperate and angry people and push them to overthrow the dictatorship in charge. They do that, like the so called Arab springs, but in the end a new dictatorship is wanted and sometimes USA intelligence succeed sometimes fail, one of that failure is named ISIS witch wasn't even much a failure since it give enough to shift American's public opinion to accept a long row of wars. Even after they know they was already betrayed with the lie of Saddam's weapons, Afghanistan as the protector of osama bin laden etc. Even though: did you really ISIS harm USA government? People, yes. But government? More surveillance is accepted by the people because of terrorism, more power was given, more state-backed crimes accepted as legal etc. ISIS have make good things for USA gov. Similarly Bataclan and Nice attacks for French gov. against their people. Long story short, I'm not convinced that a trained population can be a threat because some foreigners can also benefit from such training. About "bans and encouragements" some police actions, legal in the USA, in some other countries are not only illegal but might be a justification for a violent and armed reaction against officers because in those cases they are consider a threat to be counter in legitimate defense. So yes, no country bans certain physical fitness etc, but allow and forbid things for the clear intent of avoid forming a "ready and active" citizenship...