> You are just repeating the same failed and disproven logic that people like J.F. Dulles were advocating. I'm definitely repeating the logic of the state. To

> You are just repeating the same failed and disproven logic that people like J.F. Dulles were advocating. I'm definitely repeating the logic of the state. To be clear here, this isn't old logic attributable to Dulles or Eisenhower but the rationality behind current US strategy. This military/security logic is consistent over the past 70 years of great power struggle and I add it here not because I buy into all of the conclusions but because the arguments must be understood from the perspective of policy and decision makers in order for there to be a real dialogue between citizens and the state. Namely, citizens have to acknowledge the paranoid and aggressive tendencies of the state and understand reasoning from their perspective to counter the arguments. When this isn't the case (look at Libya and Syria) the state interprets citizens' unhappiness to have to do with the number of soldiers killed (for example) or the financial costs of insurgency and so pursues proxy wars, support of terrorism, economic warfare, information warfare and other types of irregular aggression. Anyway, pretty much fully agreed with your reply here.