First of all hiroshima and nagasaki happened after VE day. So Hitler and nazism died before the nukes exploded.

Secondly, your idea of Total War assumes every single mecca-goer is a terrorist, which is NOT the case.

Although what is needed is not a sanguine response (like resigning and forced resigning), what we also don't need is an attack against another country.

Scorched Earth does not work. It never worked in WW2: inspite of carpet and fire bombing of hamburg and other cities, the germans still fought to the last bullet.

Take the example of the Malakand in 1800s and early 1900s (time when Churchill was in Uniform).

1) Clear communication between armed forces

2) Extensive intelligence

3) Ability to disrupt enemy communications at will and on demand.

4) Ability to eliminate collateral damages completely while isolating the terrorists

In short, refusing to hit an innocent even when in doubt, but using excessive force to kill a terrorist will be welcomed by all.

For that the intelligence cannot be gathered from skies. You need to inflitrate them. However that is hard. Just as Germans found it extremely difficult to infiltrate USSR before Barabarossa (the russians lives the the ultimate in penury-eating cardboard bread) it would be extremely difficult to infiltrate these guys too. But it can be done (as was shown in Turkey and Spain).

The ability to accurately pin point and target communication infrastructure of terrorists also is very important which is why you need boots-on-ground to spy for you.

Accurate intelligence will enable surgical strikes with high precision carried out by a Bowey knife and not a Predator.

Making innocents see that the strikes are meant only for the really bad guys would enable them to turn over the bad guys more quickly. Creating collateral damages does NOT endear them to you.

Unfortunately no one has been wise to do all of this.

Neither Bush nor the Indian Government will do this because it is:

1) unglamorous

2) Time consuming

3) Less costly

4) Resolve

All of these are anathema to our politicians who aim at quick , spectacular returns and fireworks plus a wallet that can pad up their friends producing Predator and M1-Abrams...

Some may find your post offensive.

I think its correct and nails the issue.

We did not negotiate with Hitler or Tojo.

Instead of Iraq, we should have gone after S.Arabia in the first place and "liberated" them.

That's a country that's oppressed women (women's lib in Salon please note) for 1000 years, refuses to allow religious freedom of expression, is opposed by Amnesty International for its frequent inhuman punishments, etc.

Unfortunately stupid Bush and Vader Cheney thought that Iraq was an easy target.

401(k) are for losers who work for wage(singular because it is so low) at Walmart or the mall.

Real men become HUGE bankers, threaten to take down the entire financial system with them and then hold the tax payer (the walmart worker) for ransom of $800 Billion by threatening that the walmart worker's 401(K) would be worth $0.00 tomorrow from its $12 today.

And the rest 90% of our foolish selves continue to squirrel away our investments in 401(K) and CDs...

Its like the Grasshopper versus the Ant come true in a diabolical way: The Grasshopper eats and sleeps merrily in Summer, while the Ant slaves away. In winter the Grasshopper knocks on the door of the Ant house and threatens to unleash pests on its stocks unless it parts with some food. So the poor Ant is forced to share 99% of its food with the grasshopper which goes away laughing and counting the grains, while the Ant sighs and gets ready to save once more...

Huh? So, what's your point?

According to you there are only two ways out: The Husband "totally and unconditionally" forgives the LW for the losses, or the Husband berates and scolds the LW for wasting the money and gets labeled as a wife-beater.

No body in his right mind, not even you , would accept a huge loss when he/she was warned about the coming losses many a time.

There is a 3rd way which of course is not acceptable to you: Her husband already knows about the losses. Its time the LW be humble and tell the truth and work out together for the future.

But i don't think that's acceptable according to you, since you think being humble=begging.

Gandhi was humble. But he certainly wasn't begging the British to quit India.

Get out of the ultra-women's lib forums and stop accusing every husband of manslaughter if he just looks angrily at his wife for losing $30 K.

Am sure if the roles were reversed your advice to the LW would be along the lines of "leaving the stupid husband because he refused to listen to your holy & correct advice.".

He sold it to Cheney, who securitized it to Corporates.

As the man who never acknowledges his mistakes or errors of judgmement, he looks more like Hitler than the Truman he projects himself to be.

Being "unprepared" for war is something criminal.

Will the SCOTUS pull up Bush on charges of Voluntary Manslaughter by his acknowledgment that he was unprepared for war when he took a oath to defend the constitution?

Violating an oath almost led to Clinton's impeachment. In Bush's case it led to the deaths of thousands of thousands of innocents.

The best parting gift to the people of USA would be an arrest, indictment and conviction of Bush on manslaughter charges exactly one day before he remits office.

That way he is denied pension and the wastage of tax payers money on protecting so worthless an individual.