[Bob Mc]

"Through all of this, America’s real enemies have learned an important lesson: namely, that U.S. military power can only be effectively opposed by employing mass destruction weapons at the outset of a conflict. If U.S. power is to be overthrown in the world, that overthrow must rely upon nuclear, biological and chemical munitions. Only an attack that destroys U.S. conventional military advantages is workable, and this attack must be overwhelming. In order to work effectively a mass destruction attack must decapitate the U.S. leadership. It must cripple the U.S. economy and paralyze the American military. Anything short of this merely invites destruction in turn."

"It cannot be repeated too often that the weapons of choice for such regimes must therefore be nuclear, chemical and biological. Only by leveling the playing field with such weapons do the inferior states of the totalitarian periphery stand a chance against American technological and administrative vitality."

"What the United States must do now, in the wake of its victory in Iraq, is anticipate the anti-American coalition’s intensification of WMD proliferation. This will be their response to America’s victory. Since this is a potentially effective strategy, the United States must solidify its defenses against such weapons."

Strange how this author seems to dwell on what it would take to stop the U.S. It's almost as if he his trying to drive a point home to our enemies, a useful point.

[don-o]

Strange how this author seems to dwell on what it would take to stop the U.S. It's almost as if he his trying to drive a point home to our enemies, a useful point.

Yes. And IMO, he has it right.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Strange how this author seems to dwell on what it would take to stop the U.S. It's almost as if he his trying to drive a point home to our enemies, a useful point.

"It is the only logical, strategic response to our military superiority, Captain." (Eyebrow raised.)

[ctdonath2]

Not necessarily. By dwelling on the point, I'd guess he's trying to impress on the reader that we must not fall into a common trap: basking in our victory without noting that remaining enemies are studying our weaknesses. The point was dwelt upon far more by Tom Clancy in "Executive Orders". The point was exercised on 9/11: if a dozen maniacs with boxcutters could do that much damage, how much more a dozen with backpack-sized WMDs. Even the ultimate reason for this war is to address the point: to disarm our enemies of WMDs before they can use them (as Saddam knew, the only thing standing between him and ruler of the Middle East is the USA, and WMDs would provide the disabling capability he needed).

Our enemies already know this. It is us who need to understand the gravity of this point.