Seriously, apart from the poor bastards living in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya and such like battlefields, who among us has had a corporeal problem with war during the past four years? If violence and statistical risk is a problem, why would any right-thinking person choose to live in Brazil?

The prospect of a more serious conflict with Iran [Obama has said that he doesn’t bluff] may fill more newspapers, yet bouncing the rubble on Iranian nuclear facilities wouldn’t cause any shortage at the gasoline pumps in Brazil. Of course we could all wring our hands worrying about it but we’ve been there before and marvelled at the military technology and political rhetoric. So, other than the actual battlefields, it’s all just a conversation piece.

Life for me in Brazil is much that same as it was four years ago apart from the fact that money doesn’t buy as much. Regretfully, as each year passes I become more cynical about Brazil and its oh so tiresome ways; I have to guard against that as I watch the world go to hell in a hand basket.      

Esprit, you obviously missed a series of legislation passed since 'war' was declared against the phantom called Terror.  But you're not from the US, so yes, it would just be a conversation piece for you....

The new terror laws to which you refer, do they actually impinge on daily life or impinge at an intellectual or principled level?

Incidentally, I’ve seen close up the terrible results of terrorism attacks in London that came from both the IRA and radical Islam so I’m very much aware of terrorism’s reality and the subsequent security measures that have been put in place there; the juxtaposition that is awareness between paranoia and a feeling of security.

We’ve witnessed the evolution in the British government’s attitude to IRA terrorism that started with the brute and futile force of military action all the way through to the negotiating table when a cease-fire was agreed in 1998.

Today the world is still at the military force stage while fighting Islamic terrorism. Perhaps the Western democracies, or rather their innocent populations, instead of flag waving, supporting the troops [cannon fodder] and tying yellow ribbons, ought to address their politicians and suggest that they investigate the reasons why their countries are under constant alert and threat of attack and to seek a resolution beyond the expensive futility of operating overwhelming military force against shadows hiding behind rocks. The war on terror cannot be won in this manner.      

Daily life:  Living here in Brasil, no... not yet.  But it might, once FACTA kicks in (oh, but since you're not from the US, this too is just a conversation piece to toss about over cocktails).  All this financial "disclosure" strong-arming gained it's momentum under fighting the big T monster.  We certainly can't have any expats buying arms (wittingly, or unwittingly) for the _____________ (fill in the blank with your favorite T cause/charity), now can we?

Intellectual and/or Principled Level:  If my nerves are impinged anymore than now, by what is (gradually) occurring, I will scream... louder.

Yet I certainly do concur with your last statement, the 'war' presently being waged cannot be won under the present "game plan".  However, why would those in charge want to win?  Their game plan is war for profit.

“Yeah but he started it, mommy!” From the first law of physics we learn that for every action there is a positive and equal reaction.  And this law can be usefully misappropriated when attempting to analyse conflicts between human beings.

In the limited space allowed I have no intention of regurgitating the cause of the Irish problem; suffice it to say that Ireland was invaded, conquered and subjugated by the English hundreds of years ago; as was the fashion of the day. Naturally, the Irish took exception to this and struggled down through the ages for justice and freedom. An incomplete freedom was achieved following various rebellious atrocities that may be described as acts of terrorism.

That outcome was a partial victory won by the terrorists, the Irish Republican Army [IRA freedom fighters] resulting in the unfortunate and cataclysmic partition of Ireland in 1922 when all but six of the counties became the Irish Republic we know today. This political folly was midwife at the birth of Northern Ireland; that throbbing abscess eating at the brain of some republicans. Little wonder Mick Collins knew that he had signed his own death warrant when he agreed to this compromise. This death warrant also applied to the thousands that continue to follow him into the grave; all were right but now just as dead as if they had been wrong.

The rest is modern history and the lesson offered, taunted by that law of physics, is that we must examine the cause of any hostile actions before we gauge our reaction to it; always remembering that the ideas, causation and passions behind terrorism, cannot be placated by further violence. There is hard evidence to suggest that effective terrorism ultimately brings the adversaries to the table. Therefore let us sit upon the ground and tell sad stories about the deaths of men.

Countless stories give testimony that there is always wrong on both sides to be acknowledged in order that we can make amends and, if not forgiven, set aside for time to quench the heat of anger and the need of vengeance. To kill an enemy, to take his life, is too much yet anything else is too little. When a man lays dead at your feet it is a good time to hold a conversation with his soul across the great divide, to explain, to bring closure; but there is nothing left but a melancholic anticlimax and a kind of sadness combined with a type of forgiveness because there is nothing left to serve anger.

A resolution to the Irish problem is simplicity itself, however the irrational ideological objectives of fanaticism may require complete isolation from the rest of the world or the pure barbarism of a final solution; an unlikely possibility in the dimness of these enlightened times.