I cannot believe you wrote that with a straight face.

Drone warfare sounds great at first (after all, no lives our being lost on our side) – but then you have to consider two bits of reality that will undoubtedly slap us in the face if we shift to it full on. 1), they could shift to drone warfare as well, and then the battles would get nowhere – not only could both sides mass-produce soldiers to zerg rush each other, but they’d be wasting copious amounts of money and materials. B) All these drones? They’re remotely controlled computers. A little jamming here, a little hacking there, and all of a sudden you’re troops are in the hand of a 9 year old script kiddie. Or an insurgent. Both are pretty bad

And if it wasn’t the WMD’s it would have been something else. Also, does anyone here remember our good reason for invading a foreign country and toppling it’s government other than “We thought they had nukes”?

Look at this chart from this article:

Look at how the ratios change with the new tech.

Apparently the CIA has recently (past couple of years) developed a smaller Predator-mounted missile and far more sophisticated spy drones and targeting systems.

The result is the ability to make pinpoint attacks with far fewer civilian casualties.

News story here.

This kind of thing not only revolutionizes the War on Terror, but could revolutionize “conventional” war as well.

Sitting at home watching TV with the kids while political leaders and generals pop each other off in an Ultimate Cage Match? Beats being carpet bombed.

The pivot point where the curves crossed was Libya, where the Right couldn’t get its story straight and split down the middle; sometimes, the same guys urging both more military action and less, often within a few days of each other. Obama deftly finessed that one, simultaneously claiming the credit and avoiding the risks, and left them in total disarray in the foreign policy area. The myths of weak, indecisive Democrats who are soft on national defense are now being replaced by the reverse meme, that they are aggressive adventurists and engaged in (the horror), “nation building”. What utter bilge.

My guess is the next thing we’ll be hearing from this crowd is why we should stay in Iraq, but get out of Afghanistan. After all, Iraq is where all the oil is, as Cheney quickly realized.

But realistically, we will never eliminate Jihadism altogether. We can crush its financing, organization and infrastructure, as we are well on the way to doing, but as a movement it will always be there, just as there are still militant black organizations and skinhead white supremacists. These are grass-roots movements, and like cockroaches, you can control them but you can’t exterminate them. In fact, it can be argued our military presence in the MidEast, no matter how benign or effective, is the Jihadist’s main raison d’etre and most effective recruiting tool. Without us, they’ll only have Israel to justify their fanaticism.

Is it time to leave? We are rapidly approaching the point of diminishing returns against Al-Quaeda, where continued war won’t substantially reduce them any further, but where they may flare back up if we simply abandon the fight. I don’t know what to recommend next here, I just don’t have all the facts. Perhaps no one can answer that question for sure. But I hope the President has those facts. And I hope he makes the right decision.

I do know one thing. In power, the Right will reflexively do the wrong thing, just the opposite of whatever Obama would do. Other than creating a carte blanche and get-out-of-jail-free card for their corporate bankrollers and paying off their political debt to the wackofundos, discrediting Obama is their only policy position.

Just think, if it hadn’t of been for those alleged WMDs and contrived Iraqi Al-Quaeda links, this would probably all be over right now. No, the right wing bullshit machine never had it right. Not from the start.