I think the US could have accomplished more or at least just as little after 9/11 had they used more delicate instruments. If the point is to deal retribution for the suicide attacks and Osama is indeed the head honcho behind it all, then I don’t see what all of this has accomplished. It would have been easier to nab him without the ruckus that ensued in Afghanistan (if he was indeed there).

Also. The display of power was crude. I fear that these operations often have an unintentional psychological effect on the enemy as well as the rest of the world. Plus not even the US can bear the cost of these field campaigns. The economical situation was in a critical stage as it stood, towards the end of the “official” Afghanistan campaign.

Don’t you worry that all of this will dent the economy beyond repair? And have you ever considered that this is exactly what the enemy wants. Money is indeed the best weapon the US has, so expending as much of that as possible would be a good thing. And since suicide attack is their style in the first place I think they are prepared to take a beating to accomplish this.

Thus in many ways, doing nothing could have accomplished a lot more. But this course of action is obviously more satisfying. Kicking ass and everything. And I’m not saying I would have had the strength to act differently myself … probably but …

I would be interested in what you mean by “allies”? NATO? The UN?

Anyway, I assume your reference to history means WW2? Well, first of all the US sure took its time before getting involved there. Not unlike what Europe is doing now. And at the time, German tanks were rolling across Europe. I mean, this “war on terror” is but a trivial sidenote compared to the horrors of WW2 I am afraid. Or at least it should be. The US however is unwittingly turning it into so much more. That troubles me a little.

I too have pondered the possibilities of the future. And indeed, all the outcomes seem grim. I’m not so convinced that there will be a lasting conflict in the middle east though. Not that there hasn’t always been a ruckus there, but for it to escalate beyond what we see now seems unlikely.

Unless “we” let it of course.

But on their part I see nothing but small ragtag bands with a fighting spirit. Ignore them and they will go away in time. Try to beat them with the second best weapon we have instead - television, media. And not propaganda but simply to quietly extend our cultural influence.

Do not engage in battle. We already have the perfect yoke holding us all in place. They have to sell their precious oil to someone after all. Thus conflict between us and them (on a national level) seems remote. Iraq only happened because we invited ourselves in.

As for SE Asia I probably agree. Even if I see N Korea as a sidenote. They might have nuclear capability but that is about it.

The real “problem”, if one must be sought, is China. I sense they are looking for a rematch after years of being held back by everyone and everything. They had nuclear weapons for decades and no one objected. Now they are in a position where they can threaten the US on other levels. Mostly so in the financial sector. The fact that they aren’t the most powerful country on earth is just a historical / statistical glitch about to be corrected. Like you hinted, the background to the current conflicts could very well be purely economic. Will the US stand idly by and watch this? Given the US history in SE Asia, the differences in culture and political systems and the current impatience that seems to be spreading like the plague .. who knows ..

I guess N Korea and / or Taiwan could still be a spark to ignite the flame of conflict. But only if we let them. Obviously the US is aware of this and hopefully wont do anything rash. I wish.

All in all I think it is time for the US and other players as well to consider the global community, and not in terms of allies (which sounds a bit guilt-ridden). And to be prepared to make less heroic and more humbling sacrifices than billions of dollars worth of ammunitions and priceless human lives. What I’m saying here is that e.g. selling the SUV and commuting isn’t so kick-ass perhaps but in the end the only sensible course of action.

1) Do nothing

.

.

10) Nuke somewhere

We chose an 8. We’re fighting with every weapon at our disposal, including with our money, short of nukes and ‘daisycutters’. Our putative ‘allies’, who should be with us, can’t seem to figure this out and don’t seem to care. They don’t even seem to remember history very well.

Bottom Line:

1) This war is in the beginning of a 50-100 year struggle of ‘western’ people against muslim people. Its critically important for history that ‘we’ win. We used to think that mutual defense treaties would help. Now its not so clear.

2) In the short term the war will be fought with and for oil. Western societies run on oil. Without it there will be old people dying in the streets. We used to think that mutual defense treaties would help. Now its not so clear.

3) The next fight will be with asian people specially the North Koreans. We need to get ready. We used to think that mutual defense treaties would help. Now its not so clear.