Ok, we can't go much further with this, but the theology of the 20th century in the two moderated Abrahamic religions looks nothing like the Islamic faith does now over 100 years later. You're confusing The Enlightenment with being enlightened, I'm not talking about a specific historical period, I'm talking about the moderating of a religion as it matured, which has happened in both the Christian and Jewish faiths but has not in Islam (and likely won't without a stringent external impetus).

Your other error is where you describe the theology of any of the three as a monolith.

I make no errors, you just fail as a debater. We've established that for years now.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

It's pretty amazing when we use the CIA and other agencies to do the quiet work with effect. OIF and OEF could've been handled so much better than they were if we'd used agencies and Spec Ops the way they were designed for.

Absolutely. 
The military is for breaking things, and the CIA is for breaking institutions. 
OEF and OIF had a mission to build things and institutions, and I don't think we have a government institution capable of that in places where people still have tribal affiliation.

I slightly disagree. If Spec Ops are used correctly they can manipulate situations quite effectively and without much collateral damage. When they're not (or when politicians need to refill their coffers with the Military Industrial Complex) then the big guns, that being the regular military, are brought in to break things. 

The CIA is a different kind of weapon that is also very effective when used correctly but their problem is the FBI. Had those two agencies actually cooperated in the 90s there likely wouldn't have been a 9/11 but they couldn't, or wouldn't, and the result was not only 9/11 but the Patriot Act, Homeland Security and a beefed up TSA, none of which would have been necessary had the CIA and FBI acted like adults instead of toddlers.

I could go on about this but I have other things to do.

---

Absolutely. 
The military is for breaking things, and the CIA is for breaking institutions. 
OEF and OIF had a mission to build things and institutions, and I don't think we have a government institution capable of that in places where people still have tribal affiliation.

I slightly disagree. If Spec Ops are used correctly they can manipulate situations quite effectively and without much collateral damage. When they're not (or when politicians need to refill their coffers with the Military Industrial Complex) then the big guns, that being the regular military, are brought in to break things. 

The CIA is a different kind of weapon that is also very effective when used correctly but their problem is the FBI. Had those two agencies actually cooperated in the 90s there likely wouldn't have been a 9/11 but they couldn't, or wouldn't, and the result was not only 9/11 but the Patriot Act, Homeland Security and a beefed up TSA, none of which would have been necessary had the CIA and FBI acted like adults instead of toddlers.

I could go on about this but I have other things to do.

Correct, spec ops can break institutions similar to how the CIA breaks them.  But they don't construct new ones.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.