Reply #81: Eh, better than the usual drivel. [View All]

[bemildred]

Still completely inside the box, but reaches correct conclusions,
or close to them. A very clear understanding is shown of the limits
of conventional military force to achieve policy goals, but no
consideration that the policy goals are stupid in the first place,
still the zero-sum, antagonistic logic . At least there is shown
a realization that static one or two moves ahead thinking just gets
you checkmated in short order against a competent opponent. But not
yet the realization/admission that we are checkmated already, not
seeing that far ahead.

This elucidates clearly the rather narrow and one-dimensional way the
US military thinks about problems, too. They believe firmly in the
efficacy of blowing stuff up and killing people. It's an article
of faith, and their thinking does not go to places where that premise
is false. That is "not their job".

I mean, WTF are we doing trying to compete with Iran to be the dominant
power in the Persian Gulf? What dimwit decided that was a feasible
policy goal? And based on what "logic"? We are getting pushed out
of Latin America as we speak, and these folks think we are going to
dominate the Middle East. :puke: