Quote Originally Posted by Bill Moore View Post
our military treats these excursions as a form of social engineering with vague ideas of self-determination, democracy, human rights (now includes gay rights), free market systems, and so forth. We get so caught in up in nave discussions about legitimacy (for whom?) that we forget the original purpose that we employed military force to achieve in the first place.
I agree, but I think this problem starts at the policy level, and is well entrenched before the military takes it over.

When we talk about "legitimacy", we often assume that what is pursued is legitimacy in the eyes of the population of the area in which we intervene. Politicians are often more concerned with legitimizing the excursion in the eyes of their own populace, and I think that many of the more aspirational goals and more egregious restrictions that the US adopts are much more about establishing legitimacy in the eyes of the American voter than about any concern over local legitimacy. Again, this goes back to clarity of purpose and honesty in the face of our own rhetoric.

Quote Originally Posted by Bill Moore View Post
Today we rarely hear or see any real effort to defeat the adversary using force. We promote the false belief that force doesn't work.
Whether or not force works depends entirely on the goals we are trying to achieve. There are goals that can be achieved with force, and there are goals that can't be achieved with the use of force. Again, being clear on what goals we pursue and why is a good start.