That was armed insurrection, not terrorism.

The difference is more than just "the winners write the history books". The methodology was different. The patriots/rebels/insurgents weren't setting off truck bombs in city centers in the hope of making people not oppose them, and not just because they didn't have truck bombs. They weren't trying to assassinate the governor. It was fundamentally a war, not terrorism.

The minute companies of Massachusetts did constitute a well-armed militia, I would argue in the sense intended by the 2nd Amendment. They were not just gun owners, they were men trained and drilled, often with the leadership of locals who had served in two previous wars.

The US wrested control of territory from a massively over-extended empire across the Atlantic.

American Civil War 2 would be totally different.

When? Civil war involved armies and so did war for independence. Natives lost.