I have made it a lifetime endeavor to study conflict (war) and analyzing cause and effect…..and since 9/11 it seems that the US is in a cycle of endless wars……most of which had little to do with the actual attacks on 9/11…….and those that defend the endless nature of conflict…..
A continuous and repetitive thread in the commentary on the decade since 9/11—one might almost call it an endless and open-ended theme—was the plaintive observation that the struggle against al-Qaida and its surrogates is somehow a “war without end.” (This is variously rendered as “perpetual war” or “endless war,” just as anti-war articles about the commitment to Iraq used to relentlessly stress the idea that there was “no end in sight.”)
I find it rather hard to see the force of this objection, or indeed this description. Was there ever a time when we involved ourselves in combat, or found ourselves involved, with any certain advance knowledge about the timeline and duration of hostilities? Are there two kinds of war, one of them term-limited? A bit like that other tempting but misleading separation of categories—between “wars of choice” and “wars of necessity”—this proves upon closer scrutiny to be a distinction without much difference.
Personally observation…..endless wars benefit NO one but those that supply the implements of war….it is about the profits not the reason for the war.
We can make peace profitable if we truly wanted to….there is the rub….there is NO WILL!