Pangloss: "why do you view the Civil War as a *military* revolt?" I don't. But a senior military of classmates and associates did split, and not so much over slavery, but over states' rights. For instance, US Grant was never a vocal abolishionist, and RE Lee did not advocate slavery. But back to topic, I did only invoke the Civil War for effect, and to demonstrate that it is possible to ask too much of our military, especially if they are asked to embark on an era of unilateralist foreign occupations, when they have become utterly unworkable in the context of intermeshing world economies and consciousness. There is a breaking point in asking the impossible, and I am convinced that aligning the world, or a region like the Mideast, for America's benefit, through American boots on foreign ground is absolutely impossible now and in the future. I am also convinced that diligent military historians and strategists know this. I also know that as monolithic as the chain of command may seem, the military is a representative cross-section of America, and can crack with the rest of the country, just as it did in Civil War days. A broadened attempt at the more grandiose aspects of the neoconservative vision (as the PNAC outlined before taking power) would require a mobilization on the scale of the World Wars, but with a dramatically different character of political impetus: Such mobilization would require Americans to fully embrace a stance not unlike that of Nazi Germany in terms of paranoia and nationalistic fanaticism. I am not ruling out the possibility, but I strongly doubt that the country could be stampeded that way as an indivisible herd. I know officers who are already extremely conflicted over Iraq, and deeply troubled about the present course of policy. I did not mean to imply that the military could split before the body politic: But with the acceleration of history, and with the rapid consequences of bad policy, I fully expect unprecedented levels of military dissent in the very unlikely event of a US invasion of Iran, because of the strong possibility of not just overextension, but also triggering of what would amount to a new world war, with the USA this time cast in the role of unprovoked aggressor and trangressor. By occupying Iraq without adequate justification, without realistic expectations, without sufficient forces, and without an exit strategy, the Bush Administration has already pushed American society, our economy, and our most imposing institutions- including the military- quite near the breaking point- Exactly how close is unknowable, until it happens. The US government is already in the shit much deeper than the Soviets were in Afghanistan, with a far more tenuous grip both on vital resources, and on public opinion, than the Soviets were. Just because we hate to lose, does not mean that we cannot. And just because we tout "United We Stand" does not guarantee we will stand united in forfeiting our national soul.
You really like to hear yourself type dont you ? That shit almost brought a tear to my eye. lol society , economy and military to a breaking point ? WOW you couldnt be more wrong could you. Hey but it sounded good at the time huh !!
