How close are we to a World War?

In October of 1962 I read an article that asked the question; how close are we to war?  I was in the military at the time and I can tell you we were pretty damn close to a shooting war on three fronts.  There was of course The Cuban Missile standoff, at the same time a cat and mouse game was going on under the sea with Russia and the United States both playing a dangerous game of chess with highly armed nuclear submarines at times coming just yards from each other provoking and dodging.  Then there was a battle brewing in Viet Nam after the French pulled out.  The U.S. backed a South Korean named Ngo Dinh Diem who was not much more than a thug who had eliminated his rivals on his way to president.  The world at the time called for a nationwide Korean election but the U.S. was afraid the communists would win and fought to hold the election in just the South.  The resulting unrest in the North eventually led to a shooting war that as we all know involved losing thousands of American Troops. 

If I were to be asked the same question today I would have to say once again we are involved in the potential for  war on four fronts; Of course Afghanistan where we are totally involved but I can’t call it a war because in a war both sides are trying to eliminate each other.  In the case of Afghanistan our troops have one hand tied behind their back due to constrictions placed on them by both the Bush and Obama administrations and the Karzi regime regarding collateral damage.  Plus we have already told the enemy that we are leaving whether we win or lose.  Once again the U.S. for whatever reason has backed a thug who has little support of his people. 

The second front is Israel; it will only be a short while before the Arab Nations surrounding Israel decide that they can win against the smaller country.  By the way, aren’t we helping arm Egypt with tanks and F-16’s, a nation run by the Islamic Brotherhood who has sworn to remove Israel from the map?

The third front is Syria which will lead eventually to Iran; the U.S. is really in a pickle here as Russia has chosen to back the Syrian regime with weapons and supplies.  The only way the United States can win these conflicts is to actually be allowed to use the weapons at our disposal and fight to win.  These do not necessarily have to be nuclear arms as we have a huge arsenal of conventional weapons in our armory.  We just have to make our enemy understand we are in to win and will not hold back our military once engaged.   Our M.O. has been to hit and run in these engagements never to go for all out victory.  To the eyes of our enemy Americans have no stomach for war and will soon tire of the conflict.   Have we the people of the greatest nation ever become so weak that we are going to allow America to become a lesser nation who depends on others for survival?

I know I mentioned a fourth front, to most it is obviously Korea the most bellicose of the four.  In my opinion North Korea will saber rattle till the cows come home but will not attack in force until we are totally engaged in other parts of the world and stretched to the limit.  They may cause a ruckus on the border but China will hold them back until they consider we are so weak from the attrition of war that we can be gobbled up easily.  All this time our longtime Cold War enemy Russia sits and watches and waits. 

It is my opinion that without strong and decisive leadership in Washington we are being led into a world class trap that will be hard to get out of.  The United States must lead from the front and not allow the weaker nations of Europe to dictate our survival.

That’s my opinion, what’s yours?