Dispensationalism contradicts scripture and creates embarassing problems. [...] They who were told by Jesus they would see this did not. Armies surrounding Jerusalem did not mean leave except that all left and it was really good.
This has to do with the "proleptic 'you'" ("all those in the future, of the same category").
Like the mayor of California making a writing to its citizens: "when you see the buildings rockin, take your leave and get on truckin!" with regard to the BIG EARTHQUAKE that is on the docket (that every Californian resident knows is expected, but not the "when" of it)... It would be silly for its citizens that only just moved to there some 100 years after the writing (say, moved there in 2020) to disregard the memo, thinking the "you" certainly could not have been addressed TO THEM. (*wrong*)
THAT's the "proleptic 'you'".
In the section of Luke 21:12-24, the "SEE-then-FLEE" indeed refers to when they saw Jerusalem compassed with armies... and they fled and that was good.
But in the Matthew 24 "SEE-then-FLEE" (completely DISTINCT), Jesus said specifically, "Therefore when you shall see the AOD [abomination SINGULAR] spoken of by Daniel the prophet [this must refer to the SINGULAR reference he made in Dan12:11 'the abomination [singular] which maketh desolate [be] SET UP [H5414]...'--and supplies a specific day-amounts], (whoso readeth, let him understand: ) THEN let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains..."
That is how "prophecy" works.
The "day-amounts" that were ATTACHED to the Daniel 12:11 reference (Jesus was making in Matt24) are also therefore somewhat attached to what the following verse had said re: Daniel himself "[thou shalt rest (in death)] and STAND IN THY LOT [that is, be resurrected ('to stand again on the earth')] at the END OF THE DAYS" (that is, "at the END of the DAYS" referred to in that Daniel 12 CONTEXT... and verse 11 is one of those references to "DAYS")... Daniel was nowhere to be SEEN ('resurrected' and 'standing in his LOT') anywhere near to the 70ad events! [that should be embarrassing to the Preterist-viewpoint, instead ]
And Jesus was indeed in the role of Prophet at His first advent, so He was certainly authorized to do this, meaning, to prophesy.
I already addressed some of the other ones.
[...] And these are embarassing for dispensationalists.
Each of the items have been addressed more than adequately.
You simply disregard the consistent use of the "proleptic 'you'" used throughout Scripture (and especially the impact of its use in Matt24, which is a context involving a completely DISTINCT "SEE-then-FLEE" issue that is FAR-FUTURE to the one in Lk21:12-24's 70ad events, which DID HAPPEN just as Jesus had said).