Skip to comments.

Posted on 09/18/2001 8:27:41 PM PDT by SuppressedNews.com

The nation is gripped with war fever, and I have become infected with it myself. ''Those bastards!'' said Schwartzkopf, and his epithet was echoed in monumental headlines by one of the major dailys. For my part I have suggested to colleagues around the water fountain that we do to ''them,'' whoever they turn out to be, what the Romans did to the Carthaginians: Level every edifice, plow everything under, and cover the land with salt. Insure that nothing can ever grow or prosper in that hated place again.

But let us not let anger and esprit de corps overrule rationality. There are a few questions that ought to be honestly raised and clearly answered before we open fire:

• Our aim is to counter terrorism. Will the war that we wage do that? Witness the Israelis. They are the prototypical retaliators. No one in the world has done more retaliation than they. For 50 years they have promptly and forcefully, sometimes brutally, retaliated against their enemies who practice terrorism against them. And for 50 years the terrorism has continued. It continues daily and may even be more intense now than in previous decades. Can we design our war such that we avoid such a quagmire?
  
  
• How do we wage the special kind of war that is demanded against the Islamic fanatics? They hold a powerful weapon. They have stores in their arsenal that we will never have, namely persons who are willing to commit suicide for their cause. But they are not just willing to annihilate themselves but are eager to do so, believing, according to the teachings of their religion, that sacrificing themselves in a jihad against the infidels will make them martyrs and give them a special status in heaven. If our enemy has tanks we have anti-tank missiles to destroy them. If he attacks us with aircraft we can counter him with anti-aircraft missiles. But he has living, human organisms who can do things no tank or aircraft can. What is our counter weapon for them?
  
  
• Beyond the generic ''stop terrorism'' how is our mission precisely defined, and how do we know when we have accomplished it? Is it enough to capture and punish all those directly and indirectly responsible for the atrocities of 11 September, or must we subdue and occupy the offending country--or region?
  
  
• If we plan actually to defeat one or more countries in full-fledged war how confident are we of success? Afghanistan is mentioned as a likely target country. Recall that Russia, at that time no minor military power, fought without success for years to conquer Afghanistan. What would we do differently that would guarantee success?
  
  
• Assuming that we can overpower any adversary and achieve victory in the first instance, would such a victory be final and lasting? How might the contemplated war compare in decisiveness with our recent wars? For instance with World War II which was imminently decisive, with Korea which we only fought to a stalemate, with Vietnam which was in the end a lost cause, and finally with the Gulf War in which we were brilliantly victorious in the heat of the battle but are still engaged years later in a continuing chronic skirmish.

Read More Articles On:
SuppressedNews.com

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.