You claim you've already answered my question, but your answer is vague and really doesn't detail what we weren't doing properly. I am legitimately curious about what you think wasn't done on the battlefield that should have been in order to win. How was the bombing not fierce enough? We killed terrorists wherever we could find them. In your opinion, what military actions could have been taken to better fight the war on terror without the culling of civilian populations? How was our effort not good enough? How could we have improved it? What could we have done to make the bombing more fierce and effective without doing it indiscriminately? What would the military have done differently if it had been allowed to deal with the situation however it wanted?
Well, at least you've advanced from your pre-fab template with these questions......
Kudos.
Since you haven't specified which terrorists you're referring to and in which country, it's impossible to respond to these generic questions. You know, of course, that I'm not a military expert, and that I have repeatedly said we should leave the decisions to the military, but since you aren't being clear as to which conflict and which era you're referring to, I'm not even going to try to respond specifically.
Let me just say that with the surge in Iraq and the thousands of terrorists our troops killed there in 2008, we had a good portion of the problem solved, and had Iraq stabilized (as much as a ME country with a thousand year plus conflict going on can be). The terrorists were flocking to Iraq because we were there and they were going to kill the big bad Americans, and the opposite happened.
WE killed THEM instead.
As for your "paranoid" silliness in your next post. No. I don't have even a tinge of paranoia. I just understand leftist trolling because I've never been on a conservative board where it didn't happen (and I've been a participant for well over a decade). You're nicer and more polite than some, but that doesn't erase what appears to be the purpose of your posts.
If I were a betting woman (and I'm not), I'd never bet against the probability that you're here only to disrupt. I know there are one or two here who think you're legit (and they're people I respect), but nothing I've seen from you indicates you're here to learn anything, or actually respond to the thoughts in other people's posts, or the vastly superior knowledge that many here possess over your own.