If I was a soldier...

...at last, the reason for my habit to write was instead of were explained.

This is a simple post that I could have written 20 years ago. Lest you think I write all my beautiful posts in German and all the ugly ones in English, let me assure you that I'm solely guided by efficiency: If it doesn't lose in translation, I'll write it in English nowadays.

So, if I was a soldier, I'd be extremely unhappy with the political outcome of the Vietnam War, that is having to depend on mercenaries. But, better that than depending on slaves. What to do about this colossal defeat?

Must make war cool again.

So, how we do that? Focus on powerful technology, computers in particular, modern warfare, cutting edge, a little war against Argentina by a close ally, manoeuvre Mr Bond away from social comments on drugs, the energy crisis or masonry (look at Stromberg's chair!) and towards military confrontations, and then, eventually, you pick on someone your own size like Iraq.

Well, perhaps you don't sit pretty, but at least you're back in the saddle. Hence the natural dynamic of perfecting this kind of thing kicks in and, voilà, there's your new strategy of equipping local destabilisers with the weapons most suited for the situation and, if needed and permissible, backing them up by air power. Cheap, effective, limited.

Just how aggressively can mutually assured destruction be wielded? If there's a conflict, don't you need to fight? Or is it enough to intimidate and to threaten? If the people are not in it, will they not betray their protector once things get too ugly? It certainly is so in all smaller conflicts.

So, people might need to be in it, i.e. understand their interest and guard it.

WWG1WGA.

Q.E.D.