Let's not forget another scary aspect to this war. THE LEFT-WING APPEASERS!
First thought...
We faced (and still face) a larger number of domestic Communists and sympathizers than we do domestic militant Islamic supremacists.
However we have been told that this political movement is only a smaller percent of all muslims worldwide (10% of 1.2 billion is 120,000,000 violent extremists) so while domestically we may not have a large fifth column as we did in the Cold War, we face an endless horde of suicidal soldiers who have no qualms about striking at civilian rather than military or political targets.
We also faced less of a threat of direct violent action from the Communists than we did of internal institutional takeover by brainpoisoned useful idiots.
The only limitations on the use of force by our enemies are the limitations of the force that they can employ. They are limited by their abilities to bring force to bear, but they have no limitations as to how much force they'd be willing to use.
We, on the other hand, have many limitations on the level of force we're willing to use. Most of these limitations are arbitrary and senseless, and some are wise and necessary.
In short, the enemy would destroy the world and consider it a victory. We not only fight to preserve the world, but to preserve those who consider us their enemy. For us, victory is much harder to define, except that our enemies be suppressed and reduced to the least measures of force available to carry on their war with us.
In the late 1960s and mid 1970s you did because there were bomb throwing radicals as there were in the 1920s.
Kerry's "antiVietnam War" group plotted the assassination of elected members of Congress who did not vote the right way.
But terrorism was the exception, not the norm, among communists in the US.
There was no connection between Germany and Pearl Harbor either but that didn't stop us from entering the war with the Allies.
A syndicated columnist appearing in my local paper tried to argue this morning that the "war on terrorism" wasn't nearly as scary as the cold war, nor were the terrorists anywhere NEAR as bad as Hitler.
This article is a good refutation of his column. I wish I could remember his name....
My reason for it being scarier is it's happening now.
Negotiations are impossible. There is no negotiation with anybody who is determined to kill you, even if he has to die in the attempt.
Rabid dogs are shot. There is no cure for rabies.
Communists are at least semi-rational. Dead is no way to impose your ideals upon the world.
What I can say about this war is it is scary for the lunacy of the enemy and because of our fear of what they will force us to become in order to win. It won't be pretty if they get any nukes and use them. We don't want to do the things that we did in WW2 to win--destroy entire countries from the air, subjugate their countries, bring them to the point of complete surrender to our will. But it may come to that.
Oh, I know this one....um, because we are going to lose this time?
Here's a quiz: if one group of people wants to fight to the death for their beliefs, and another doesn't even know what it believes, what will happen?
Lets not forget the New York Times. There's almost as many communists there than in the entire township of Hollywierd.