Think that the recent crackdowns you might have seen, heard about, or even witnessed in real life, especially amid tenacity against illegal aliens has been inordinate? Think again. What you have seen in the past 6 months might have ministered to about an estimated 5%, to be respectful, of the monster sized drug problem in the US. The number might be closer to 2% or lower in other opinions. A number of narcotics dismantling and seizures that appear to have gained huge amounts of attention in the media, seem to have the story focus mainly on popularly known drug names like fentanyl, meth, and cocaine, a segment of the drug problem. The US drug challenges is just a few dots in the heap of the global drug problem.

A complete rundown on everything that has occurred amidst unrest, destructive behavior, and protesting since September 1 of this year, 2025, might take years to compile. As we speak now, DNA techniques are being used to identify the remains of some of those lost, especially in Nepal.

There is a label going on in popular media called 'Gen-Z' or 'Generation-Z', supposedly receiving the blame of whose behind the protesting. Gen and Generation supposedly refers to a generation of young adults about 20 years plus or minus a few years old as of today in 2025.

Perhaps what comprised the protests in terms of the ages of the masses of people, might be individuals from that generation and age group.
However, and there's a big however, there is (to be respectful, plausibly), more to the motor or motors behind the mayhem than just numerous 20 year olds under decentralized leadership upset because of impediments set forth against freely expressing biological themes uncomfortable with 'religious conservatives' on social media.

There is coordination in the protests which eventually grow in magnitude and unruliness and morph into attacks.

One of the NGO, 'non-governmental organizations' said to be behind the push for confronting Nepal government aspects, is [in English] Hami Nepal. (Translation for 'We are Nepal's, might be a reasonably practical English translation.)

The group gained traction post the founding after a devastating earthquake years back. Although the advent that may have been the causation of the materialization of the group was natural disasters, contrasted to for instance, a man-made advent like a coup-de-tat attempt, now that the group is up and running, it has caught the eye of those that sense they should be watchful of it.
Everyone watching the group, may not all necessarily be on the same page; there could be those on the right and those on the left for instance.

Hami Nepal, is said to have been started by a Mr Gurung. His first name when written in English, is Sudan, yes, written out just like the country that sits south of Egypt.

Meanwhile, as analysts study the composition of the protestors, common denominator similarities of other activities and dimensions of society being noted may arise.

There are other challenges in both Nepal and Indonesia besides Gen-Z protesting.

Drugs, that's right drugs, the infamous global narcotics and drug problem, including sales, distribution, usage, trafficking and connected other types of trafficking like human and weapons trafficking that typically go with it, purchasing, manufacturing, mixing with other substances, masking substances and a while bunch more, exist in Nepal and Indonesia, like it exists in numerous other countries.

Often there is a large amount of the petty crime and user base of the drug game and arena on the basic levels, apparent to the public, comprised of relatively naive teenagers and young 20 somethings, which happens to be pretty much one in the same with Gen-Z.

Where are some of the places volatility and Instability come in? First, instability is often used in global politics to refer to stability of an economy or government; that's not really what's being discussed here. Discussed here is more physiobiological and emotional volatility instability, and of entities and organizations.
For example, young protestors ramped up intensity of protesting and went charging toward a government building, or significant infrastructure. There may be some questions as to the wisdom of doing that from a safety standpoint, knowing that defense forces would react. Whoever led them or leads them into that, probably was not a naive 20 year old, (but rather someone plausibly older and with more seasoned experience in social engineering that gets people hurt). Then the next leg of the hurtful process, the reaction by defense forces, where in some places in the world, line spots in Nepal and Indonesia, may have soldiers or members that are young and in their 20s, 'following orders', (by someone more seasoned and older), and in certain circumstances, may carry out activities that can materialize as very awkward or uncomfortable. For example, a protestor winds up getting rolled over by a tank. 

Note that a 21 year old was run over by a tank recently, which is reported to have contributed to an increase in some of the unrest.

In brief, usually what winds up happening is the 20 year old soldier with more weapons and bodily protection, conducts oppressive anti-protesting measures on the 20 year old protesting counterpart. The third leg then appears, where that dominoes into infuriating the mass of 20 years olds even more leading to more unrest, more anti-protesting, around and around and eventually a violent clash results. Clashes could be a reaction or recurrent.

What happened in recent weeks in Nepal, is that a Prime Minister is said to have stepped down, in the timeline after the spare of heightened unrest. Unrest included a jail break of about 15,000 persons, a large superchain that employs about 20,000 people was targeted, perhaps a mall of some kind as well, and a parliament building.

Now there is an interim PM, in the first female in history to hold that post. The elections are supposedly going to be held in 2026.

As shown by the protests, there are no guarantees. The cliche, man plans... but what really happens, may be something else.

Again respectfully, different countries where they have their equivalents to what the US has in the State Department, seem to have distributed safety precautions that differ somewhat. There appears that there may be no guarantees to 100% guarantee and rely in terms of a potentials that could happen, hopefully they don't happen, on; such as 'contact the authorities if you feel you are in danger'.

When and if the authorities like a junta that emerged or guerilla group that took over a territory, is one in the same as the danger you are calling in on, it is obvious to see it is a dangerous equation, that can leave you in even more danger than you started.
Therefore the soundest advice might be the safest precaution, which is to avoid at least certain regions when unrest is taking place. Do not rely on a swift skip to the airport as a recourse, the airport might be a hotbed of risks as well.

Food, shelter, clothing, shelter, equal treatment and equal access to jobs, economic stability, and upward mobility, have been longstanding ideals. Not to say simply it's ironic, because again, there is an expectation for the normal person to have a need for food at some point, need shelter in harsh weather conditions, and have clothes on their back, if not them, their children and family or subjects under their leadership, but in places like Nepal and even Indonesia, at least in ancient times and even through today, all those material ideals, are shed by certain classes, and that's what made the venerated individuals, some of whom became leaders and objects of study in leadership topics.

Wrapping up for now, when both sides have vulnerability, volatility, and instability, young protesters on one side, and protesting suppressors on the other, plus, whatever it is either side might get into or try to get into when things go awry, or just try to go awry, or foment or try to get things to go awry, might spell out that there is a recipe for disaster actually in the pot cooking.

Everyone on earth is not living inside the right and left of the brain of whoever went forward on to follow through or not follow through with a missile strike targeted to a location in a sovereign nation not their own.

As of right this moment 9/2025, it may not be widespread information to the public (yet) just where the physical point of emanation missiles came from that struck targets in Qatar over the past couple of days.

In some aspects, it might not matter all that much.

However there are other aspects where doors are open to serious issues.

If missiles were indeed 'from' Israel, there may be a 3 to 4 option list as to what may have occurred, in order for those missiles to be fired and land on the target.

Option 1- missiles fired from within the geographic confined of today's Israel boundaries (boundaries according to for instance, transnational entities that have certain recognition of nations a precursor to membership).

Option 2- missiles fired outside the above referenced boundaries.

2a- missiles emerged from another country on land
2b- missiles fired from sea, such as a warship
2c- missiles fired from a machine already in the land, in this case Qatar
2d- missiles fired from the air, which could be just like the above list, over Qatar, near Qatar, over water declared it undeclared, from over Israeli airspace, combination, unclear, or not applicable

Some of the above options could include missiles flying over or near the Kaaba and Prophet's Masjid and tomb, which according to the Muslim World, is about the furthest 'no no' one can possibly get.

No no basically in English refers to principles of risk and protection.

Issue/s #2:
If indeed the basic premise, which is what popular media is saying, is Israel is seeking out targets of the referent Hamas, both sides need to, if they haven't already (it's about rest assured they know this and more), recognize the humaneness, today's catchword, humanity, of flying missiles around. If you know you may be the highly potential target of a missile strike, why be in an area that you know if struck would endanger the area, the people, and trajectory of aerial weapons, in and around it?

More background:
Historically, say since about the 1940s, Israel or forces within it, have struck targets outside the Palestine/Israel landmass, for example, targets in Lebanon.

The 'organization' known today as Hamas, on a very basic level and linear historically timeline, was not there/here yet (back in the 1940s). The daily news stories rife in popular newspapers and radio from 1946 to 1956 were not necessarily 'Israel seeks Hamas targets'. 
It may have been more, particular groups declaring to be acting on behalf of advancing certain plans targeted certain targets.

All said, the idea of following through on a vow of destroying any and all threats post the October 7 incident of a few years ago, may be something Israel or forces within it are doing, attempting to, highly considering based on calculations, etc., however again, what's going on in a particular entities brain or mind, is what's in their brain and mind. Just because that entity might assert something is justified based on their assessments and calculations, does not necessarily mean it's justified by everyone else in the world, which brings up another major issue and concern.

The line in the sand of how much is too much, and when going to far, such as in the efforts, statements for, or intentions of defense, protection, security, and revenge.

Israel, Palestine, Jerusalem, Gaza tensions, are not the only places in the world and its history where this subject matter has come up. Entire populations and towns have been wiped out the result of the backlash of an attack whether actual or perceived.

Word is spreading that a shooter emerged taking the lives of at least 2 children and injuring at least 17 others; perhaps 20 or more persons physically affected by gunfire as of about 11am EST, August 27, 2025.
The location was Annunciation Church in South Minneapolis, MN. Developing story. Law enforcement and family reunification seems still active there.