[Monty22]

The korean war was stalemated by stuff they couldn't possibly build too.

So was Vietnam..

It's common that wars are fought by proxy. Afghanistan/USSR was too.

[William McKinley]

This is not acting without rules- it is acting to a precise rule:

"is permitted to use force against other agents, who are not permitted to use force."

It may not be an equitable or egalitarian rule, but it is a rule. A pretty good one too, although the rule taken to a more moral level (without sacrificing to egalitarianism) would be

"is permitted to use force against other agents, who are not permitted to use force-until such a time as they demonstrate that they have acheived an appropriate level of civilization."

After all, the Brits can use force too.

[Filibuster_60]

This appeal for America to act less civilized will offend some; but it does offer a convincing explanation for the inner logic of America's tough new foreign policy.

If we waged war without rules, things can get quite ugly - not only for our enemies, but also for our own troops. Apart from being too civilized, the reason we don't get down and dirty is that our tolerance for casualties is very low. The victories in Iraq and Afghanistan have relied heavily on the fact that the populations of those countries for the most part welcome us as liberators. The reason we won't extend the war to other parts of the Islamic world is that their populations won't be quite as friendly, and even if we kill millions of them with our superior firepower, we'll be faced with guerilla combat orders of magnitude greater than what's taking place in Iraq.

[river rat]

Long past time to terrorize the terrorist...
Stop negotiating with these lunatic Islamists...

Kill them..at every opportunity...
Once they have been defeated --- then dictate peace terms..


Remember....
THEY are the bastards that declared this war and attacked MANY TIMES before the West responded...


Semper Fi

[Billthedrill]

The cause of this anomaly, Harris replies, is that the West plays by a strict set of rules while permitting al Qaeda, the Palestinians and Saddam Hussein to play without rules.

I believe Mr. Harris correct in this. But those rules are, after all, self-imposed, and hence self-revocable. And so it has proven.

Of course the radical Moslems were misled by this sort of rule structure - who can blame them? What they saw, and what I find most curious about this, is that other Western powers such as France and Germany felt so terribly threatened when the U.S. decided to behave in contravention to rules that were clearly working against its interests. I don't think it's entirely paranoia to conclude that were not only happy with such rules, but were happy specifically because it was U.S. interests that they worked against, further, that they intended to employ those rules against the U.S. themselves, and even further, that they were actually doing so and had done so in the past. This certainly seems to be the gist of Chirac's comments. A U.S. less restrained by these rules is a U.S. more vulnerable - and that was precisely what they wanted. Why?

[taxcontrol]

We (meaning all the civilized world) have tried to civilize warfare. Now we have rules about what can be engaged, when, how and what can be done afterwards. Gone are the days of "total war", gone is the thought "to the victor go the spoils", gone is the horror of war

and also gone is the fear of nation states to wage war.

Witness how may wars since WWII have stalemated. The fighting goes on until someone start claiming they have been brutalized.

I used to be that nations feared starting a war because they feared to LOSE. Now that fear is gone. Homes taken, why there must be a UN resolution to restore them. Buildings distroyed, why the victor must now rebuild and the walk away. It even seems that some take glory or honor from the loss. That somehow their cause is now more noble.

War is a terrible thing. It's true horrors are the worst nightmares of human existence. But when we remove these pains these horrors, our well meaning intentions only cause war to be used more frequently.

I fear the slippery slide into constant "low intensity conflicts". Better to bring the war to a bloddy end where one side says "hold, enough" and thus be damned that to constantly fight the war in the streets, markets and back alleys for the next generation.

[American in Israel]

How, despite their general incompetence, has this trio managed to guide the course of events as if they were powers in the traditional sense?

Just like kids on the beach, a brat can stomp sand castles quicker than talented kids can build them. It all stops when the brat gets stomped instead.

It is way past time to stomp brats.

[paul51]

When your the only one that plays by the rules, that's not being civilized. That's being a chump. I'm glad we are learning.

[SandRat]

Impose a double standard: Act on the premise that the U.S. government alone "is permitted to use force against other agents, who are not permitted to use force."

Wrong, Daddy spanks the naughty spoiled child for throwing a temper tantrum, and breaking things.

In other words, the restaurant mater-de hears the words spoken; "Alright that's it were going to the car!"

His words are; "That brat's going to get his butt tanned."

No double standard here, just the imposition of rules for proper behavior that most of us learned and for some of us, in the very manner that we learned them on occasion.