Sure, we could probably bomb Iran and the rest into the Stone Age, but even if the regimes did (eventually) collapse under the weight of poverty (debatable) they would only be replaced by another as bad or worse. All we would accomplish is further entrenchment of the Mideast notion all their problems are the fault of the "decadent imperialist West." We cannot expect countries where democracy is completely foreign to magically figure it out once the despot du jour gives way to the next. Democracy is not possible in such an environment, and the only way to change that from the outside is the same way we did it with the German and Japanese populations who had been indoctrinated by fifteen years of fascism.

It is not a quick or easy process. It demands intense universal re-education (or re-indoctrination, if one prefers) with the democratic and human rights principles generally lacking now. It demands economic investment like the Marshall Plan giving people sufficient prospects to value their lives too highly to strap on explosive vests. Perhaps most of all, those things demand occupied Germany and Japans 24-7 curfews, manned military checkpoints at every major intersection checking Allied issued documents of every passer-by to verify they are not only whom they claim, but authorized to be, not just on the street, but on THAT street for the purpose they claim. That eliminates the nervous uncertainty of wondering if every wagon driver has an RPG under his blankets, because every last one has been checked.

Unfortunately, we cannot do it with 100,000 soldiers, or even 200,000; Iraq proved that. The day the guns fell silent in Berlin we had 1 million combat veterans in Germany alone. The Taliban and Al Qaeda are not more fearsome than even the remnants of the Wehrmacht and SS. Random Iraqi and Afghan kids are not more thoroughly brainwashed than Hitler Youth. The implication a US military that trampled the Nazis and turned Germany into a stable productive democracy cannot do either facing a bunch of goatherders and priests is absurd. We failed because 1) our national will to do so now is not nearly so great as it was then, and thus 2) we do not have anything like the manpower needed to impose effective martial law on an entire country.

As I noted earlier today, when rt alluded to the basis of the franchise in Starship Troopers, we learned the wrong lesson from Vietnam. Instead of realizing we should not to go to war without a darned good reason, one motivating Total War and the conviction to finish the job, we concluded we could go war for any reason or none as long as only sent volunteers, because then "no one is there except those who wish to be." Unfortunately, it really does not work that way, because soldiers do not get to approve their deployment, nor refuse it if they decide the war does not serve the defense of America to which they have pledged their lives.

Saturation bombing can eliminate militant Islams threat to us and our allies; Bushs Iraq mistake was failing to realize his father had already done so, that Saddam threatened no one outside Iraq. ICBMs cannot be built in spider holes with whatever parts available within the country, and without an economic base to purchase them no embargo is needed to stop Russia and Chinas sales of nuclear material and technology. If that is enough (as perhaps it should be) our task is not difficult.

However, truly changing such countries on a fundamental permanent basis entails the same level and all the same aspects of commitment it always has. It almost certainly entails the same kind of international coalition that administered three distinc sections of Germany under US, British and French occupation. Occupied Japan was entirely MacArthurs creation, but raised the specter of a completely different domestic threat to US democracy.

Perhaps nation-building is ill-advised and we should be content with national defense. Yet if we reject that premise and attempt to replace despotic regimes with democratic ones, we can only succeed with the same level of determination that has always required. There is a very simple method of gauging it: When people stop shouting, "WE DON'T WANT A DRAFT111" and start shouting, "WE DEMAND A DRAFT111" it is tenable. Until then, national defense is the limit of our capability because it is the limit of our will, and the first rule of strategy and tactics is "destroy the enemies will to fight."