Originally posted by goldenarm
The terrorists only respect one thing: superior force. They are beyond reasoning.
The US should take lessons from the Israelis: take out the masterminds with extreme prejudice while trying to minimize collateral damage.
Admittedly, the US has made its mistakes over the years with its foreign policy.
I had promised myself to refrain from further "chit chat" debates. But I find this subject so compelling, and today's trading so dull that I can't resist. Besides, I haven't been personally attacked by Max or his ilk for a few days. Was gone to see my oldest son over the weekend at college.
I agree with Goldenarm here. I believe that the terrorists are beyond reasoning, and only respect force. I also agree that Israel has come to recognize this a long time ago, and has managed to contain thier enemies pretty well considering the size of their country, and the enormity of their opposition.
And of course, it must be admitted that the US has made significant mistakes in the past. But we have to go on. We cannot let "guilt" over past transgressions limit our responses to today's problems.
So essentially, I believe that we must deal from a position of strength. We are certainly THE power in the world today. But being powerful does not in any way assure we will use the power correctly. It does not mean that the exertion of power can not backfire on us. If we attack Iraq today, and accomplish all our goals there (whatever they may be construed as), will it lead to further anti-American terrorism? Is there a way to anticipate this with any kind of accuracy?
So my belief, and I have stated this previously, is that the use of force in a conventional manner is now obsolete. We are in a different world. Obviously the internet alone allows communications among terrorists, enemy states, everyone, in a manner not imagined only a few years ago. In 1962, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, there was not even a "hot line" between Washington and Moscow. The crisis led to the implementation of the "hotline" 40 years ago today (I believe). Today, Osama Bin Ladin, or Saddam Heusein can, in theory, speak anonymously to anyone anywhere at any time. As can we all.
So technology has changed the world. And only technology can be used to maintain our freedom and our political, military, and social objectives.
I have mentioned before that my younger son has joined the Navy. He is going into the Nuclear Propulsion Program. This required him to obtain "top secret" clearance status, even though he still has the rest of his senior year of high school left. And he is still only 17. But because he has qualified to meet the requirements for this level of security, he has already been approached by the intelligence arm of the service. He is so far committed to following through with the Nuke program (and I hope he does), but obviously the intelligence branches of the services will become more and more important as the world progresses technologically. Now at his age he is thinking about his future after the Navy. He knows that he can get his nuclear background and come out of the service and get a "Homer Simpson" job and get paid quite well. What he hasn't thought about (to my knowledge) is that if he goes into the intelligence branch, he will have great opportunities too. He could work with law enforcement, or industrial security, or perhaps fields not yet invented. Not yet even conceived of.
What seems to me to be of great significance is that "intelligence" is what will determine the strengths of countries in the future. Having nuclear weapons, or any weapons of mass destruction will eventually proliferate to any country or government that wants them. The PREVENTION of the deployment of these weapons is what will be important. And this can only be accomplished with superior technologically supported "intelligence". This is the future. Having weapons, having manpower, having heavy armament will be meaningless in the future. A "stealth" aircraft is only "stealthy" to an unsophisticated opponent. An arsenal of nuclear weapons is nothing but a deterrent insofar as "mutually assured destruction". The days of who has the biggest weapons is over. Or will be shortly. The time for "out-thinking" the enemy is here. As it always has been. But now it is the
only truly effective "weapon" of victory. Sept. 11th is vivid proof of this. We were caught flat footed. Al-Qaeda exploited our weakness. They achieved their tactical strike. Their strategy was poor, but their tactics were strong. The result was they accomplished only bloodshed. They did not accomplish their strategic goal of elevating support for their cause. It is all about deeper planning. Playing chess thinking 20 moves ahead.
When the US and Russia were armed to the teeth with missiles pointed at each other, it was like two guys standing in a swimming pool filled with gasoline. Each guy had a book of matches. What difference would it make who's matches were bigger? Or who got to throw their match first? No difference at all. What would make a difference is knowing exactly what the other guy was thinking. Or planning. Or who was outside the pool and what they had, and what they planned.
So I envision the day in the very near future where our armed forces will be reduced to a mere fraction of what we have even now. And that our resources must be put into the training of, and equipping of a very small, but very elite and effective core of our most qualified and intelligent young men and women. An armed force that is able to maintain strength and superiority not with brute strength, but with the ability to anticipate every move our enemies may plan, and to avert them with whatever it takes. And when force is needed, it must be on a very efficient and very focuses basis. There is never a reason to fight an army if the enemy is just one leader. Or a handful of strongarmed thugs.
Israel may have violated international laws by selectively eliminating their perceived dangers (step right up, Traderfut2000). But Israel still exists against overwhelming odds. We in the US have a big advantage right now. We need to maintain that advantage by keeping up with the times. To waste our money and our human resources with obsolete weapons programs is counterproductive. We are in a never ending chess game. And only thought and strategy matter. Tactics of the past are essentially worthless in today's world. We let loose with so much firepower in Afghanistan in the last year, but we have no confirmation of the existence, or lack of existence of our intended main targets. And this is with deploying billion dollar aircraft with multi-million dollar missiles against men on donkeys living in caves. What is wrong with this picture?
Time to develop a 21st century policy and let the old soldiers fade away. How many tax dollars are spent on a tank. How many tanks do we need? Where will we use them? A tank would have been a devastating weapon in 1776. It was a common weapon in 1916. What purpose does it serve in 2002? And beyond? Yet we are spending money developing newer and faster and heavier tanks to fight wars in the deserts? Rommel is long dead. And so is his approach to winning a war.
God bless America.
Rs7
