War is to be used as a poisonous drug, only as a last resort. But once the decision for war has been made, there should be a clear goal. You put your best general, Powell, in command, give him the goal and the tools he needs and then get out of his way.

Everybody understands that we are going to defend this country. But I'm not sure that making an all-out assault on Iraq and Afghanistan at the the same time is very wise, as Deputy Secretary of Defense Wolfowitz has proposed. Afghanistan's mountains can absorb an army. They have missiles and will be able to challenge our command of the air.

I would begin by thinking defensively. Not since the Civil War has the capital of the U.S. been so threatened. In the Civil War they built a chain of forts around Washington that are all preserved, maintained as parks. They should all have anti-aircraft batteries installed in them. I'd establish a 10-mile-wide no fly zone around Washington and New York City. National in Washington, and LaGuardia and Newark airports in N.Y. would be closed.

At the Pentagon the most advanced laser-guided anti-aircraft missiles should be posted, one in front of each of the five faces of the building, set to fire on an aircraft at the approach altitude necessary to slam into the building, a few miles out. You'd have it set to fire automaticaly when anything crosses that laser beam. There'd be a whole network of lasers, and if a plane flew through any one of those beams, the missiles would know immediately where to aim. I don't understand why this hasn't been done already, or maybe I just missed it.

I'd assume that there are plans for more attempts on the Pentagon and on the Empire State Bldg. I'd have troops armed with Stinger Missiles posted on the observation decks.

What if Bin Laden had ordered all four aircraft to crash into the Pentagon? We wouldn't be able to contemplate much of a war now, because we wouldn't be able to organize the logistics necessary.

Exit Strategy

Once defenses are maximized, but before you attack, you need to have an exit strategy. Make sure you've got one on the tactical as well as geopolitical level and everything in between. When and How are you intending to depart? ... which feeds into the next question: What is your mission, what is your goal?

The exit strategy should be, we leave when we have Bin Laden in a cage, and all his top henchmen, including his cell leaders in America, in Germany, 50 other places... and spare the followers. Conversely, I hope we don't do as the Germans did in WWII, indiscriminately killing innocent civilians, intentionally killing civilians in reprisal, like the Israelis (who target Palestinian policemen, which I think is insane).

Where did this hatred of the United States come from? Out of nothing? Out of the Koran? Out of animosity, out of jealousy when they are living in such poverty?

Palestinians cheered the destruction of the World Trade Center. Why this intense hatred of the U.S? When you punish a population for acts of terror, then you have a perpetual war like Israel has. The Israeli secret police and the U.S. created Hamas, which went on to become a deadly enemy.

We created these terrorists. The U.S. helped organize and equip the Taliban, who now harbor this inveterate enemy of ours. Such hatred took years to develop.

In WWII the Germans by their cruelty created enemies out of anybody they didn't kill. Sullen populations, occupied countries. This is not I think a good policy to pursue.

This should be a guiding principle: it doesn't need to be announced in the news, but the wise strategy, the one which is most in the US interest, is to minimize 'collateral damage.' So no one gets confused about who the victim is, where the justice is in this situation.

There are many people in Washington D.C. who don't care about that. However, where they should care is in the very fact that, by being cowboys, they perpetuate the crisis.

What we need is to capture Bin Laden, his upper echelon, including the cell commanders, try them with dispatch and dispatch them, and spare the followers, and spare the population to the degree possible and consistent with the primary objective.

In order to get Osama, you have to know where he is. More than that, because he is probably in many different places, you have to know how he gets from one place to another. And he's going to vary his routine, so you can never predict where he will be. You have to research and find all his bases ... the man lived in a cave, he's probably in a cave right now. He'll be tough to find.

We don't have the technology to allow us to find a man in a cave. If we can't get Bin Laden, we can at least get his command and control apparatus, and shut that down.

If our objective is to shut down Bin Laden's communications, we don't need to do any fighting on the ground.

We could, and should, cordon-off the whole country of Afghanistan. Not only blockade it with planes and ships and tanks on all its borders, but all its electronic communcations would be jammed.

Afghanistan would be taken off the grid: Take the whole country down, so that there is no power, no phones, no energy except oil lamps. And continue this cordon until the Taliban say, 'O.K., we'll give him up.' It's very simple, and it doesn't cost a drop of blood.

A great general does not waste any men in unnecessary attacks.