Quote Originally Posted by Bob's World View Post
I really see no way one can attack members of the Pashto populace that associate with the Taliban without having extremely negative effects with the larger Pashto populace from which these men originate. The tribe may well agree with the cause the Americans are supporting, yet as we have killed their kin, and likely non-Taliban members of the tribe as well in collateral damage, we have alienated the tribe as a whole.
No one is talking about attacking the populace. No one is talking about killing the Non-Taliban. That is exactly what we will avoid doing. We are talking about only killing the people who are killing other people.
Basically, you suggest taking no action against the Taliban because the people they are trying to kill will hate us for trying to kill them? I wonder how do their victims feel about this?

Most are coming on line to agree that the Westphalian construct of what a state is, or is not, is evolving. Yet few are willing to adjust how they think about dealing with such challenges to the old view of sovereignty. To this I simply suggest: "Free your mind, and your ass will follow."
Sorry, but valid though observations about the treaty of Westphalia may be, we now have world composed entirely of nation states, working as competing or co-operating economic and political powers. You cannot undo that. We have to deal with how people are, not how we wish them to be.

How would this work exactly? I have no idea, this is evolving strategy in an evolving environment. Free your mind. Trust your damn parachute and go out the door.
There is no such thing as an evolving strategy. Strategy can only change if changes are made to the Policy and the means by which that policy is set forth. It can't free-wheel. Strategy is instrumental. It's like surgery or construction. It's not just something that somehow happens. No policy, no strategy.