Wars have never brought any prosperity to the engaged nations and will not do so in future as well.

Look at the 1 Billion $ a day cost to the US for simply maintaining their presence in Iraq since they cannot leave behind their self-created mess with the Iraqis. It has started to take its toll on them financially. And will ultimately result in the Republicans getting booted out of the White House soon.

The world has to unite against the sectarian forces and also against the US like errant nations whose trigger-happy attitude can put any country into spot anytime.

America`s foreign polcy will change when the Republicans are thrown out at the next election. Witness Nancy Pelosi`s trip to Syria.

Good point Dr.Ettefagh
But dont you think that U.S.A is performing some failed policies due to its unrestness which in part is the outcome of 9/11 ?
I think what americans has done in tha last 5 years was full of fools and mistakes.In Afghanistan when Iran streched his helping hand they bite it by their unappreciat use of Axis of Evils term .They still repeat the same policies here in Iraq .They still need Iran's given hand ... the same old story of afghanistan.
America is not a reliable state .They are not only nervous because of their losses in the last few years but also arrogant too.
Though America is a democracy , but her foreign policy around the globe is just the sign of it's inablity to follow Realpolitics.Without Realpolitics the mightiest powers are doom to decline.

Anonymous:

Who needs this kind of clutter any more? Given the Coalitions of Willing and unilateral cowboyism, all rules and customs are thrown out of the window!

But a bit more seriously, I think Americans should hold early elections. And if they do another Florida kind of litigation, then U.S. must surrender its sovereignty!

The US should not speak for Europe. Europe should do so by itself. Iran`s hyperbole needs to be separated from the unwillingness of Bush and his cronies to stop depending on Bogey men as a substitute for analysis. He treats too many countries according to his slogan: either you are with us or against us. He must have got this silly line out of a John Wayne movie. It is cretinous and yet it seems to be a pillar of his foreign policy. Bush came to office as an unworldly figure who had not travelled outside the US and who is not intellectual in any sense. He does not have the wealth of experience that a President needs to make wise decisions. His responses are frequently violent. Cho has caught our attention with his massacres. Only some of us are troubled by the massacres wrought by Bush. The world, in future, must not be led by the US because nations must identify their own needs and then work in cooperation with one another. The idea of one nation being supreme is imperialistic. It does not work. I am sure that China, India, Brazil, Russia, Europe and its member States, Japan will be able to work with the US but the US must realise that its self-interest cannot be the basis for world peace. Bush went into Iraq because of oil. The reason was farcical and he has cause death and destruction on a monumental scale. The interests of all nations must be balanced by compromise and force must be left out of the equation. That is why other nations must assert themselves notwithstanding that some in the US cannot live without the idea that the US is the world`s greatest nation.

Holly Cow, how do you revoke something you did not issue?

I agree with the writer that USA is the one pushing its luck. Given America's behaviour and the fact that they have demonstrated their inability to elect a president and govern themselves properly (Bush and Gore), I think the Queen should revoke America's declaration of independence and it's sovereignty and make it subject to direct rule from London, pretty much like Northern Ireland.

Otherwise, this Russian Threat and or the Muslim Monster is nothing except a bad American movie. Also remember that the Yanks told us the end of the world is coming with the Y2K computer bug, and they all believed that Saddam will chemical them when they bought duct tape and plastic sheets.......

The russian strategy is the opposite of what they did in the 80's (pick a fight with neighbouring countries in the south like afghanistan) and 90's(radical internal restructuring).

Now they are consolidating ties with like minded countries in the neighbourhood like china, germany, venezuela, s.arabia, turkey, indonesia, n.korea and even cold war foe pakistan. All this while simultaneously increasing control over previously chaotic internal economic and political structures. Powering all these moves are the bountiful natural resources(hydrocarbons) of mother russia and quite diplomacy.

Funny thing is america is now doing what the soviets did previously in the 80s and 90s. Preoccupied with Iraq its influence and standing is being eroded in the south, east and even west,
while the great czar putin laughs all the way to the bank!

Speaking about the missile shields this is a waste of time (and money) in the age of ever improving and easily available cruise missiles and long range stealth submarines. Atleast thats what the russians (and a lot of others) think.

The cold war never ended. The russians have just won it(as they usually do) after a smart strategic retreat.

Europe has in fact decided to go its own way. Upcoming elections in France and departure of Tony Blair will make this more clear.

America has not closed the Cold War chapter and still thinks that, some how, Russia is going to attack. This is why it never supported Russia in its change from communism. Rather, it acted as a vulture to pick on the body of a large economy that was presumed dead on its back by USA. That was and is a wrong presumption. Russia has solved many of its problems. It has rich resources and highly educated scientists. It had bad luck for a while and it is a civilised, organised country.

Well said. It is mostly a product of a state of denial in Washington. Bob Woodward's book with the same title has been fascinating reading. It is amazing that decision making in Washington is very shallow.

I am thinking if Iraq to USA is what Afghanistan was to USSR: a hopeless fight without direction and both defeats can be attributed to Al Qaeda and bin Laden's pack of wild extremists. Is that going too far from reality?