We need a complete redefinition of war

This War Is Not Over Yet - NYTimes.com: "Mr. Obama is trying to have it both ways. Ending major conflicts in two countries helps him deliver on campaign promises. But his expansive definition of war leaves in place the executive power to detain without charges, and to exercise war powers in any region where Al Qaeda has a presence"

'via Blog this'

These things are at least abductions (guesses):

Ground wars among nations are kaput

Wars that extend beyond national boundaries may be necessary

Wars fought with radical limits on human casualties are more and more common

BUT: Our current understanding of war is somewhere around the time of Woodrow Wilson

As with much else these days, we talk with no foundation, to recall Saroyan.

SO: The confusion revealed in a consideration of Iraq and Afghanistan relates to the obsolescence of our understanding of the dynamics of war

This calls for an urgent and public and transparent international (aka universal) definition of what constitutes war now and in the future - a definition which strives to limit and control the use of lethal force.

This in itself is a sign that we can do little until we reckon universally with the nuke issue

Charles Sanders Peirce - Thinking in Threes