CJM –

I am a long-time poster, back to the days when Belmont Club was on Blogger. I am no friend of Putin, find him a thug, and a dangerous one at that. See my blog on why I find Putin a very dangerous threat. That Putin is smart and informed about the West makes him more not less dangerous. Saddam’s army could not and did not copy how the US Army fought. Putin’s did, however imperfectly. [Clearly, logistics remain a problem.]

Nor do I think that the West is humiliated. But I *do* see a persistent gap — between those who have effectively disarmed and those who have not. If Russia is a recent pensioner, it’s neighbors and near neighbors are even older pensioners confined to wheelchairs. If you look at my Blog I do not have a sanguine view of Putin or his ability to stay out of conflict with the West. [One thought: the cease-fire may be an attempt to preserve Obama politically.]

But it is a mistake to under or overestimate our enemy: which Putin really is. On the subject of oil prices if nothing else.

I think Rumsfeld, unfairly maligned, was in fact correct in evaluating the strategic landscape facing the US: threats often distant, fast moving, requiring a “lighter” US ability to project force globally to protect US interests. Rather than Gates vision of counter-insurgency (as Westhawk has discussed). Gates has been proven wrong, and dead wrong, at that. IMHO surveying either Pakistan or Iran, it is just as likely that at Iran at least would copy Russian efforts and abandon that mass-attacks that characterized former Soviet and Soviet client tactics. Saddam’s million man army is truly dead.

Propaganda and DoS and other cyber-warfare attacks are merely marginal things.

If the Pentagon saw this coming, they were so marginalized that the Bush Admin did not listen to them. I don’t think so, there’s no “I told ya so” from the Pentagon bemoaning CIA incompetence (or that of State). Which I would expect if they foresaw this coming.