Is all out bombing worth it?

[customerserviceguy]

27. For better or worse

we simply don't have what it takes to fight the way we did in WWII. Some see that as a positive thing, some (myself included) see that as a negative thing, and yet others don't think about it until its their lives that are personally affected. Seeing the Cold War end without an actual WWIII being fought simply solidified the "we can do this surgically" idea that still pervades the highest levels of our military.

We don't have generals who know what it is to win a war decisively, how would you expect them to develop that mentality? WWII had plenty of experienced officers who knew what victory in WWI looked like and how to achieve it.

We've possibly "outgrown" total war, and are willing to take the civilian casualties that result from limited warfare. Can you imagine a modern President doing what FDR did with Executive Order 9066, and rounding up all Islamic people in the US? Or even a lesser measure, such as rounding up all Islamic people in our Armed Forces, and quarantining them, that surely would have stopped Nidal Hasan's massacre, but we're satisfied with simply dealing with the aftermath of the tragedy rather than preventing it.

I argue that since we no longer have the will to truly win a war, and our enemies all know that if they prolong one long enough we will tire of it, and they will win, that we simply avoid getting into one wherever possible. Sometimes there will be notable exceptions, but they would be rare.