But is the American population sufficiently populated with enough people to even get us to this point, or are they more likely to surrender and not even fight if such drastic sacrafices as needed during WWI and WWII are needed to win a war today? I have my doubts.
Seems a missing ingredient in our actions in the recent past [and currently] is the absence of the kind of level threat as from WW II enemies. Actions in Korea or Vietnam were never perceived as a threat here. Their being 'communist' was their problem. Likewise some are calling today WW III or the like. But enemies using suicide car bombs and stolen planes do not evidence the power to make citizens feel threatened. Hence, the current theme is assigning a projected a future capability to fear. Uncertainty becomes certainty without even the calculus of China and a resurrected Russia. We would do well to re-examine President Bush's policy of strike first to make sure we pick the right target to strike.
Evidence of rational thought, sir. Well stated.
Suicide bombings at malls, sporting events, and other areas of large public gathering could be pulled off with great ease and little effort.
How hard would it be for you (or anyone else) to have got up at 2 AM on Black Friday, stood in line at Best Buy with 1,000 other people, and upon entering a packed shoulder to shoulder Best Buy at 6:00 AM detonate a device, killing 200 people? You probably could have come up with the plan at noon on Thanksgiving and have everything done and ready to roll by 6 PM.
If such scenarios started happening in America with Islamic suicide bombers, in your honest opinion, do you think the America people as a whole (or a vast majority) would stand up and demand that Congress, The President, and the US Military wage an all out, no holds barred war against Islamic countries that are known to fund and support such actions?
I suspect the American people would not.