"He said something to the effect of "guns don't win, only better ideas win". Not if the thinker is held at gunpoint"
In either case it depends on the numbers of the forces. In either case we have a psychological urge, adapted for a time before civilization, to try risk our own death killiing the bad guys. We do not have a psychological urge to risk death standing up for liberty. Even if not killing gives us the same outcome, we like the notion of risking our life fighting over a non-violent approach. Suppose the crazy example of all the people of the world who oppose Hitler trying to walk up to him and peacefully cart him and his top leaders off to jail. Millions of people would have died, but it theoretically would work. But we have an urge to engage in war and risk our lives trying to kill Hitler and his cabinet. We (I included) do not want to do a passive resistance operation in which I walk up to the enemy and get peacefablly killed. I want to fight back in a war effort, regardless of whether it's the most effective approach.

Esp when dealing with criminals who don't even have a real nation state, it's important to supress the urge to imagine the criminals are a nation to be defeated.

How does one prevent false flag events?

Guns win if you are the only one who has one. Would I prevent another 9/11 if I could? That is a tougher question than it seems. Prevention is the reason given for NSA spying, TSA screening and every other attack or suspension of our liberties. I guess the real question is what am I willing to do to prevent another 9/11. I have always thought it would be best to blow up something in Russia and China and make it look like it was ISIS or Al qaeda that did it. Let the Communists handle it.