AnalPhilosopher

This is a vast multi-front war. We have known terrorist groups based in Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Somalia, Yemen, and Morocco. Add to this Indonesia, Pakistan, Philippines and probably Malaysia. We need to be hitting in these countries as well, but politically, financially, and logistically, this is not possible. In addition our European "allies" constantly undermine us virtually every step of the way. China, Russia, North Korea and European countries sell arms to these countries, just as do we. Are we targeting traditional money routes such as banks hard enough? What are we doing to recruit help in Muslim countries? This war is a vicious low-intensity conflict of, most probably, very long duration. Just the kind of war that democracies are lousy at fighting. I have the feeling that nothing short of an American city, or more, going up in a mushroom cloud(s) will get us to fight this seriously. What we have done up until now is only semi-serious, but with the spineless body politic that the U.S. has, this is as good as it gets. Osama Bin Laden is one man, and even if we stop him this will continue. Afganistan is just one country. Taking it out,which we did, did not stop the attacks. Tom Hitchner's analysis is simplistic in the extreme. Only a liberal could think BS like this and not be ashamed. I must repeat, this is a vast multi-front war and we have not even engaged many of the fronts yet. What have we the civilians been asked to sacrifice in this war? Nothing at all. Look what civilians were asked to do in WW2 for comparison. We are not serious and we will pay a price for this later. Ask Neville Chamberlain.