That has been proven time and time again, to the French in Indochina, to the Russians in Afghanistan, and at many other times and places.

I always go back to a quote that is attributed to Publius Cornelius Tacitus and which has been roughly translated as “They made a wasteland and called it peace. .”

And, before anyone draws any wrong conclusions, this is absolutely no aspersion on our brilliant and brave military, it is more a reflection on those civilians who lead us into and during such debacles.

“We have proven to the world that our mighty military cannot subdue even third world countries like Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.”

I generally agree with you, but on this one I have to take a little issue with the implications of that statement..

I firmly believe that our military can take on—and resoundingly successfully so—any army, navy or air force in the world.

Our military will always be able to –and, again, resoundingly—defend our nation from any and all attacks.

And, if we wanted we could “subdue”, defeat, any “third world country.” However, that's not what we are about.

With respect to Vietnam and, to a greater extent, Iraq, we were not trying to to subdue or take over a country, we were fighting (rightly or wrongly) in Vietnam, guerillas, an insurgency and in Iraq, a terrorist movement that we ourselves invited in.

As has been proven in Indochina, Afghanistan (before), and in Afghanistan now, it is an extremely difficult mission that is as much poltical, diplomatic, etc., as it is military.

Sure, we could wipe out Afghanistan, Iraq (as we almost did), etc., but what have you achieved?

I believe that I understand what you mean, but I just wanted to (perhaps) clarify it?

I don't know if I have succeeded.

Now, as to “Time to rethink our approach to international relations.”, Amen!!

Thanks for your comments,

Dorian

Maybe we should devote more effort to avoiding unnecessary foreign entanglements, instead of deciding which weapons systems , each of which fails to acheive victory, should dain our national pocketbook.

It is time to question the base assumptions that: a) we have the most powerful military in the world…does most expensive really equate to most powerful? and b) that foreign adventurism can be equated with necessary national defense. If we revise our assumptions to something as simple as the purpose of the military being to defend the nation, not to provide defense plants in key Congressional districts or use foreign adventures to battle test our new military toys, we could save our treasury and our tax payers untold amounts of cash and save our country untold embarassment.

DLS, this is your most asinine recurring theme. Spending money on things the majority wants is “buying votes” to you. It's called democracy. As for “winning cheap minds” your team takes the cake there, mobilizing an angry, snarling fringe of haters who spew vitriol (like you) and lies, based on easy manipulation of their low intelligence.

Oh Austin…I'm so hurt….but don't be sorry, I'm a Social Capitalist!

Sorry you have failed in life, and are now so bitter.

I guess corporate welfare will have to be cut out completely then. Oh well.

for once I agree with you. ( To a point ) When we spent so much over the past 6+ years and have what, exactly to show for it? When Mil Def spending is almost 1 trillion? and schools get how much? Defense Contractors are a neccesary evil, but have become bloated ticks over the decades. $600 ashtrays, $ 200 hex nuts remember that chestnut?

and with Wall St megabank CEO's giving themselves 100 mill bonuses after cashing their checks with our money, we are suffering Stockholme syndrome. yeah let's cry Socialism while Health Insurers continue to raise premiums and CC companies do the same. Umm, yeah. right we're all played for suckers here. We have met the enemy, and he is us. Walt Kelly, genius.

WE ARE BROKE

Hmm, yes indeed we are, and indeed we may have made the right and prudent choice cancelling the F-22.

But apparently we are not too broke for people like yourself to clamor for total government health care ($1 – $3T), $T Porkulous packages, $T drags on the economy from the Waxman cap-and-trade-away-our-future bill, etc.

General Atomics creates the Predator, (your posts picture). The Predator A was 3 million bucks in 2001. So why do they charge three times as much now? The F-22? HOW MANY BILLIONS???? Once the zeros behind your prime integers pass a certain count it just becomes irrelevant or what?? These defense contractors, though I love them, REALLY rape us when they can get away with it. For crying-out-loud WE ARE BROKE, step up to the plate you capitalist arse-wipes, its your country too!