This is typically what US Foreign Policy achieves. We tend to support the losing side in a roughly stalemated situation while we manage an international "peace process". This results in far more casualties and lasting grievances than would a quick, decisive victory by either side. For example Afghanistan, Iraq where we continue to keep the Shia majority from decisive power, Kosovo, Bosnia, Palestine, etc., etc.
We maximize global misery.
He's also not always correct - he readily admits that in Breaking the Phalanx.
But I guess because his prediction about a military objective is not 100% accurate - he's mocked on FR? LOL. It's laughable how unserious some FReepers are.