[RobRoy]

>>A simple "you are wrong" would have been sufficient with a brief rebuttal.<<

I disagree with MNJ's "long" rebuttal.

He says this:

>>Modern war is as much about Economics and Logistical might as numbers of bodies. HERE are some numbers that show why no one will be able to face the US on the battlefield and win in our life time. Our enemies are not stupid. That is why they will NOT do anything that will bring a straight up Conventional fight with us.<<

But ignores the Tet offensive. True. We will win in the battlefield, but what it takes to get us there can be quite traumatic. And if we continue to “measure” our response, to really win decisively in the battlefield, we have to be motivated. And what motivates us (things like pearl harbor and 911) is never good.

It also ignores the fundamentalist muslim mindset. At least Nazi’s did not have religious zeal. A Nazi suicide bomber is an oxymoron

[schu]

It should be clear that the Islamics desire to "destroy" America and the west is not based upon a modern military conquest. But that does not preclude another approach to victory, where victory is defined as the west becoming an Islamic theocracy and adopting Sharia.

Europe is a terrific example, you cannot defeat Islam by offering nothing as an alternative. IIRC, less than 10% of Europeans attend church, when the people start looking for answers after a nuke goes off in London or New York, where will they turn?

schu