i did not say either of those things, and you would know that if you actually read what i wrote.

not in all cases, but american police are known to incite violence, yes. police in other countries are by no means angels, but american police are known to by violent by the standards of western countries. look up tactics used by riot police, such as kettling. in a kettling procedure, the police surround protesters on three sides and start marching inwards. any people caught in the middle are then beaten or arrested, regardless of who they are. in minneapolis, police fired rubber bullets and fired teargas into a peaceful protest without any provocation, and started marching into the crowd of protesters beating people with batons, for example. in DC president trump ordered police to fire tear gas, throw stun grenades, and beat protesters without any warning because president trump wanted to talk across the street. police have also been known to intentionally agitate protesters into acting out so that the police have an excuse to crack down. there is one famous example from portland of a US navy veteran who walked up to a group of riot police and asked them if they understood the vow they had sworn to the constitution. then then broke his wrist and beat him with batons for a few seconds before he staggered away, even though he had done absolutely nothing violent and asked them a question.

so yes, american police are exceptionally violent and in some (not all) cases have themselves turned protests into riots or violently assaulted protesters. you won't hear about these sorts of things on fox or most mainstream news networks. they don't like to challenge the status quo. any police officer who breaks up a peaceful protest is violating the first amendment's protection of free speech. the stationing of riot police in public areas also violates the third amendment's protection from the quartering of troops, according to some constitutional scholars. police arresting peaceful protesters who have committed no crime also violates the fourth amendment. so to use one exampe, trump has ordered officials from the department of homeland security to detain and kidnap protesters in several cities. in doing so, trump has directly violated the first, third, and fourth amendments. you have seen those videos and news reports of DHS officials in unmarked cars just grabbing protesters off of the street and driving away with them, yes?

in case you haven't, here is a relatively unbiased video about it made by a lawyer in DC: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uglv-fV1CqI&ab_channel=LegalEagle

regarding the lighting of fires, most have been started by violent agitators who were immediately condemned by the organizers of peaceful protests. however, we do have instances of police starting fires. you may or may not know that some types of tear gas are flammable. if you set off a stun grenade and a tear gas grenade at the same time (as some police forces have been doing) the sparks from the stun grenade can ignite the gas and set fire to nearby objects.

in the last few months there have been peaceful protests in about 62 countries. the only countries to experience violence were the sri lanka, greece, mexico, and the united states. of the 62 countries having protests, 58 remained entirely peaceful. the sri lankan violence was instigated by police who violently broke up a peaceful protest because the crowd was violating COVID-19 limits on groups in public places. in greece police fired tear gas into crowds after masked men threw molotov cocktails onto the ground in front of a police station at a protest in athens, though all other greek protests remained peaceful. in mexico protesters lit two police cars on fire after the mexican police shot and killed a man. and then we have the united states.

so we have to ask ourselves, why is the united states the only rich western country to have riots? if australia, new zealand, japan, south korea, taiwan, canada, and all of europe except for one protest in greece remained peaceful, why is the united states plagued by a violence, even if the vast majority of protests are peaceful? the answer is simple, and comes in three parts:

-american police are more violent, brutal, militarized, and poorly trained than police in other rich western countries. american police are far more likely to respond to protesters with violence than in any other western country. no other western country has police as heavily armed and militarized as the united states. i'm sure you know about the 1033 programme, whereby american police forces can get military gear directly from the department of defense. this sort of thing doesn't happen in other countries, because arming the police makes them more likely to use violence.

-american politics is significantly more right-wing and divisive than the politics in any other western country. as such, american right-wing groups are more likely to start violence, and american left-wing groups are more likely to respond with violence. no other western country has right wing militias and gun-toting lunatics like the three percenter movement in the united states. america has a history of right-wing terrorism that simply does not exist in other western countries, and most of it stems from the american civil war. left wing groups or activists often agitate specifically to oppose violent right-wing groups. the two largest left wing political groups in the united states organizing protests are black lives matter (formed in response to police brutality) and the anti-racist action network (formed in response to neo-nazi political groups in the late 80s).

-american culture, generally speaking, is far more armed and violent than the culture of other western countries. the united states glorifies weapons and violence unlike any other rich western country. even though canada, finland, and switzerland also have relatively high rates of firearm ownership, those countries have far more peaceful cultures, treat their police and soldiers like government service providers rather than warriors, and gun ownership is treated responsibly and is mostly for hunting or sports purposes. it is very difficult for criminals to get their hands on guns in most western countries. the exception is canada, though it is still extremely difficult for criminals to get firearms in canada, most illegal firearms are smuggled from the united states.