[Autocratic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is stupid. One guy's opinions are deemed a "reality check" by himself? Just because you're in the military means you have some spectacular insight that we cannot comprehend? You have some good points, but to call this war one of national survival is embarassingly inept, but I point you to andy's response.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the GWOT is not a war of national survival what do you think it is? A war of convenience? What is Al Qaeda's stated mission?

You are in fact correct that this is one guy's opinion. But I guarantee you that my insight is far broader than many simply from first hand experience.

[ QUOTE ]
Just because you're in the military means you have some spectacular insight that we cannot comprehend?

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems to matter for John Murtha, who has insight as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

The "GWOT" (which I assume means greater war on terror) is certainly not about national survival. On their best day, terrorists took 3,000 lives. More than that number were born that day. Terrorism is a media operation. It intends to strike fear into the population, because they cannot win a conventional war. You really think there's a legit chance of total destruction? I guess nuclear weapons could come into play, even though they would not decimate the nation. Regardless, I was referring more to the war in Iraq specifically.