Lileks has the goods on it. Normally I'd say read the whole thing, and I don't want to say that it's not worth doing so, because Senor Lileks could write about his dog's bowel movements (or equally, or even more entertainingly, the lack thereof) and be worth reading, but apropo the title of this post, be sure at least to read the first half or so.

The second half is optional, at least from that standpoint.

Some interesting Rummy quotes:

"Today, we lack metrics to know if we are winning or losing the global war on terror. Are we capturing, killing or deterring and dissuading more terrorists every day than the madrassas and the radical clerics are recruiting, training and deploying against us?"

"Does the US need to fashion a broad, integrated plan to stop the next generation of terrorists? The US is putting relatively little effort into a long-range plan, but we are putting a great deal of effort into trying to stop terrorists. The cost-benefit ratio is against us! Our cost is billions against the terrorists' costs of millions."

IMHO, he needs to consider what makes terrorists tick. The default assumption among most readers of this blog (who also tend to be fans of the Administration's foreign policy) is the issue is simply about "killing, deterring, dissuading" as many people as possible and that the madrassas & clerics are just a tiny evil minority that train & deploy terrorists. Give the Arab Street decocracy, whisky and sex and they'll become just like us in a generation or so, right?

What if (scary thought) a majority of Arabs actually is in general agreement with these Islamist groups, though? Looking at what's happening in Iraq (where the American track record is mixed at best) and elsewhere in the Middle East, it's difficult to discount the possibility.

MARCU$

What if (scary thought) a majority of Arabs actually is in general agreement with these Islamist groups, though?

That is not just a scary thought, but the scary thought. It implies, if true, that the only end to the war will, perhaps, be massive genocide, because if it comes down to us or them, we showed in 1945 which side we'll take.

Sadly, Osama didn't seem to read his history that far back. He seems to have started with Vietnam and gone forward.

Based on the latest polling results, this is exactly the problem that the Israelis are facing--a majority of Palestinians seem to favor continued murder of Israelis even if (and I suspect, actually, especially if) they get their own state.

...