We may not have exactly intimidated other Nations, but
IMO we have made them think much more seriously of the weakness of their own military and their defences.
The problem here is that our enemies are not nations. If national leaders get more timid while their populations are getting more radical, who gains? Our old buddies at AQ, of course.
Some hostile nations will get more timid, and that will help AQ. Some others, aware of the political restraints we face at home, the isolation we've imposed on ourselves internationally, and our stretched military forces, will call the bluff. That will put is in a difficult place.
Did not plan to need an occupation in Iraq but the Iraqis needed much longer to get their act together than expected.
Expected by whom? That expectation was a ridiculous pipe dream from the start. Of course an occupation was necessary. That was obvious from day 1.
If N Korea or Iran become an imminent threat( that nasty word again) Pentagon planners and the State department will develop plans to end the threat using minimal ground forces.
I wish I shared your confidence in the planners. If anybody has come up with a viable plan to end the Korean threat using "minimal forces", it's a well-guarded secret.
Terrorists IMO are making it harder for the rogue Nations. By killing people of any Nation, like Turkey, Spain, SA, Phillipines,Koreans, they are making it much easier for the UN to garner support for any action that may be proposed.
I'm not sure it's working out that way. A lot of these nations seem more interested in pulling out of a fight they don't see as theirs than in getting revenge. |
