What is person to think? Attacks in a war, are by their very nature secret.

No one has ever won a war, by giving their committed and lethal enemies a safe haven. Al Queda has hidden in the civilian population by strategic design, and has proved masterful at public relations. I don’t trust them. I would not be surprised to later find out that they have brought in bodies to parade to the media.

Who do we trust for our information? Al Queda? Our government? Media?

You have to wonder at the wisdom, innocence, and responsibility of a parent hiding Al Queda in their home with their children.

This war could end peaceably, if Al Queda would simply lay down their arms. Clearly they are unwilling and still fanatically committed to “Death to America” campaign.

What are the rules?

Is this attack an intentional violation of international law?

Should we bring the new President up on charges?

Can we ever win?

Is winning important?

What tactics are legal?

What are we willing to do to win?

The question becomes how do we win this war, and bring our soldiers home?

I don’t have the answers, but I do know that there are consequences to all decisions of war that involve loss of life, and all too frequently innocent lives.

I hate war, and blame those that start them.

~

Win?  What exactly is a “win”?  Kill them all?  Who are “they”?  Kill the bad guys?  You kill and you inspire new recruits.  You kill them and you inspire more - and inspire dissent in your own country.  Tyrants have tried killing all only to be killed themselves. If anyone practiced this it was Tamerlane - and his empire did not last beyond his own lifetime.

Win?  Win in Vietnam?  Win in Iraq?  Win in Afghanistan?  Nobody has “won” in Afghanistan since Alexander - and he had the sense to just pass through.  But maybe someone knows what the definition of a “win” there is.

Doug raises good questions.  I’ve yet to see this one answered by those who think we should win before leaving.  Whether Iraq or Afghanistan.

This is an emotional topic, as it should be with the attached loss of life. Hopefully we can all agree that we should do whatever is possible to eliminate war. Having said this though I must politely take exception to John’s remarks.

I believe that we did win WWII, and we did not cause it. Remarkably the anti-war sentiment on Dec 6, 1941 was at one of the highest peaks in American history. It disappeared overnight. No blame affixed to the anti-war movement, their hearts were in the right place. I think reality set in. Serious concentrated diplomacy had produced no successes except to delay our military preparation, and enhance the preparation of the enemy.

The advent of the Kamikaze pilot, although startling, especially at the lives we initially lost, the committed suicidal terrorist was neither invented in the 20th Century, nor is the method for defeating them unknown today. You have to kill them one by one.

The argument that killing a Kamikaze pilot would some how spawn another two radicals to take their place, like some kind of multi-headed snake, proved to be false. While we cannot accurately count the suicidal maniacs, what we know now is that there were not that many volunteers to commit suicide, and when the suicidal maniacs looked at the death toll of the Kamikaze pilots, there were even less volunteers.(You want me to volunteer for what?)

Did we win WWII? Yes, but the world lost 50,000,000 people, and most were innocent.

The peaceful and free world made an incredible mis-judgement in handling Hitler, Tojo, Mussolini, and Stalin. Ignoring the true intent of gathering threats is not without serious risks. 911 is living proof of this.

Could we make the same mistake again?

It is ironic, but worth considering that if Iran was allowed to have free elections today that 90% of the population would vote to resume free trade and diplomacy with the US. I lived there for 3 months, and the popularity of the United States amongst the common citizen is extremely high.

The government keeps its citizens in line with extreme violence and its is most certainly pursuing an atomic weapon. This regime is as dangerous as Nazi Germany, in my opinion, but the world has never faced a totalitarian nation with a nuclear weapon and the suicidal will to use it. Al Queda is a flea compared to the threat that Iran potentially is.

Making a mistake in how we handle Iran could conceivably dwarf the loses of WWII. We cannot allow this nation to spiral out of control.

Once again I don’t have the answers, but maybe the better question is not how to win this war, but How do we solve these serious problems between people? Can we point to previous history and find examples of what solutions work? What prevents war?

As Mark Twain was thought to have said; “History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme.”

~

On another recent post I suggested that taking a public health approach to these problems might prove more effective, asking, “How many unacceptable aggressions arise as a last resort against the perceived enforcement of inequities? How many might be mitigated simply by providing better basic opportunities?”

It’s not that I think schmoozing Al Qaeda zealots would be that useful, but working productively with the other 99% of the population could give them a chance to stand up to extremists.  Killing members of the civilian population only alienates their surviving families and friends, cultivating widespread distrust. I imagine this especially true under the unpredictable, quiet anxiety of high-tech unmanned attacks.  We merely afford them the same justification Israel just used to invade Gaza. 

Here’s the problem: No insurgency has ever been put down from the air, and controlling the land in Afghanistan is, as John point’s out, at least problematic if not impossible.  Anyway, we can’t afford it. The prospect of adequately policing that territory is completely out of phase with our current domestic priorities. It seems this is the perfect chance to try a real “hearts and minds” strategy.  But it could be too late.

Truth is, I don’t feel very threatened by a group of brigands hiding in those border mountains.  I already suspect their 9/11 operation to have involved either a bit of crucial assistance or a lot of luck.  In any case, the likelihood of another such success seems remote.

At the end of the day, it’s only the voices of the moderate majority that can rein in extremists - whether among Muslims there or Christians here.

I will probably regret posting a comment on a topic I cannot comprehend; but here goes.

I agree with much that Tip, John and Doug have written; however, it?s Doug?s question ?What prevents war?? that I find most thought provoking.

If you observe two pots of water, one that is over a flame and beginning to approach a boiling point and one that is not, they both look alike.  Many despots have successfully prevented internal conflict for years and even decades by keeping a tight lid on their subjects.  Does that prevent war, or only postpone it until the lid is removed? 

Perhaps rewording Doug?s question might be instructive:  ?What promotes peace??

All things being equal, one would think that most people would choose peace ? for themselves and for their children ? over war.  What then disturbs this naturally peaceful state?

Again, just thinking out loud with no real knowledge, it would appear that people who experience a sense of freedom, opportunity, and self-determination will gravitate toward peace.  It doesn?t appear that material wealth is a critical factor because many tribal communities with little wealth live peacefully if left undisturbed.

As the earth?s population continues to swell, disturbances among groups of people are sure to mount.  What can be done to instill freedom, opportunity, self-determination and other ?peaceful? ingredients to places where levels are too low for freedom to reign supreme?

One answer we know won?t work is to promote covert operations that manipulate or overturn existing regimes.  What others options do we have?

Clearly, there are many pots throughout the world that are approaching their boiling point.  The sooner the world figures out how to inspire peace among these teeming populations, the sooner we will prevent war.

Please accept my apologies for contemplating ?out loud?.

Remember Chairman Mao’s famous quote “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” Seems to me this is one of the core threads of human history.  That and trying to rise above that thread. 

Are we there yet?

Well, you all have hit the historical hot buttons of human against human aggression: religious extremism in its several denominations, the will to power, etc.

I think it was Woodrow Wilson who pointed out that war is the natural extension of economic competition.  This seems in keeping with Larry H’s observations.

As disillusionment sets in for the Obamaphiles, the next phase will be the “at least he’s not as bad as Bush” phase.

It seems the change we’re going to get will in large part be changes in Obama.  During the election fever the nuance of his statements was ignored by the faithful. He said he would pursue a war in Afghanistan. 

But don’t lament.  McCain would not be doing different. We got the best we could hope for given the choices.

Hopefully Obama won’t waffle on important domestic issues like health care reform, and a tax system that is more equitable and fosters growth of the middle class again. 

But in foreign affairs, I’m afraid, he’s just a pawn in their game.