The good professor discusses Eric Alterman’s analogy between Iraq and Vietnam. He asks,
So, the question raised by the Vietnam analogy here is: Are we serious about winning? And who, exactly, is going to intervene on a massive scale to stop us if we look like we’re going to win big?
Well, there are several places from which opposition could arise. Most obviously, there are the other Islamic nations, one of whom (Pakistan) has nuclear weapons. They haven’t shown a lot of teaming skills, but they might be able to pull something together if they see the United States as a common threat. There are other countries that might be interested in helping to pummel us. China always comes to mind, as do various parts of the former Soviet Union if the wrong type of people gain power. Also, given their reaction to Israel’s fight with terrorists, we should keep a careful eye on Europe. I’m sure they could use a big strategic partnership with the OPEC countries, and some of them have caused trouble before. In combination, these countries could be a serious threat, especially since they can pile on with the opportunistic abandon of a bar fight: If our forces get sucked into the Middle East more than we expect, we could lose our strategic mobility, tempting countries like North Korea to make their move.
None of these disasters, however, are imminent. China is focusing on local matters, Europe seems resigned to complaining without doing much, the Arab countries have no powerful unified military organizations, and there’s no talk of them ganging up on us. So the answer to the question “who…is going to intervene” is that no one will intervene if we act before our enemies coordinate their efforts.