I was deadly serious in starting this thread.
Even with Crimea and the Ukraine, I struggle to see a large scale `boots on the ground' engagement now.
Consider how war weary the US population is for example.
Forgive my civilian lack of knowledge of military tactics but is modern ground war now really about securing held territory?
If you've nixed opposing forces from the air already - destroyed just enough infrastructure to cripple any military response, but not too much to saddle yourself with a huge reconstruction bill... the implied threat of total destruction and occupation is enough surely?
I guess the irony of it all is that all those boots on the ground couldn't secure Iraq.
Just interested in the debate - not a wind up.