Listening to Richard Perle on NPR last night (brave, foolish man) go on and on about how we have to 'win' the war on terror, because we can't afford to 'lose', got me thinking:
What exactly does 'losing' mean? Does it mean our opponents 'won'? 'Won' what?
Consider this: after 9-11, we lost our innocence, innumerable civil liberties, international credibility and respect, and further hundreds of American lives (not to mention all of the innocents we've murdered along the way). So, the bad guys won, right? We, in the form of our misguided executive, have amplified to astounding proportions the damage wrought by those 4 errant planes. And for what? The path we've chosen can only lead to ever-increasing death and destruction. The 'peace' bush seeks is the peace of death.
So, what if we let the other guys win, I mean really win. What if we did everything they asked us? Get our military out of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Cut off support for Israel, or at least bring it in line with the international support we afford the rest of the international community. Rein back exxonmobiletexacoenron, get them out of other country's affairs.
So, we 'lose'. So what? Much pain might ensue, to be sure, if we didn't withdraw carefully. The world's energy markets, it's lifeblood, would destabilize. The middle east would destabilize.
Nevertheless, this is one option open to us. Instead of following a path that can only end in Pax Americana, withdraw, gently, steadily and with clarity.
Instead of goofing around with moonshots (really, I'm all for space exploration but the Moon? Geez) invest in fusion research. In the meantime, we bite the bullet, invest in fission plants (ick, I know, but they'll do until we get fusion up and running).
If America wants to lead the world, let it be by example, not force.