Steve, Britain learned quickly what worked with the insurgency in Northern Ireland and the British mainland, and it wasn't street-fighting, heavy weapons and bombs. A political strategy over 30 years brought implacable foes to the table. "The long struggle" works because insurgencies over time erode under measured military pressure and diplomacy, and are often consumed in pieces to democratic processes.

Syria suppressed mercilessly an Islamist revolt in 1982 which liberal democracies could not sanction today. The United States can use neither the British or Syrian strategies in Iraq because both models require a state, and the state was removed by potentate Bremer in the regime-change. Iraq's puppet gang favours Iran.

Canada has just finished an analysis of its six years in Afghanistan, asking "What are we doing?" instead of focussing primarily on humanitarian objectives, ostensibly our reasons for being there in the first place. The answer: failing militarily and in development because of ill-coordinated NATO and UN strategies.

Canada and the US aren't "talking sternly." They are recalibrating. They have learned that conventional military superiority is no guarantee of victory in guerilla warfare and, on the evidence, may produce opposite results i.e. Iraq.

Regards, King