Nelson Ascher at Europundits seems almost on the verge of despair over the ability of America to prosecute this war successfully, especially in light of the apparent incomprehension, re-assumed complacency, and even opposition of so many in the West. As he points out, quite rightly:
There are many who, probably sincerely, don’t believe in the very reality of the war. There are others who are on the other side. Even on this side of the conflict, there’s much disagreement about how serious is the war, who is the enemy, what would constitute victory and how it should be attained.
Part of the difficulty people have in understanding the stakes in this war - what some have called "World War IV" - may be that the main existential threat to the West, or what we still call over here "the American way of life," does not come chiefly from Islamic fascism. The struggle may be better understood as having several dimensions, including the Free World vs. Islamo-fascism, but also including democratic capitalism vs. collectivism as well as North vs. South and Order vs. Chaos.
The U.S. remains the leader of the Free World, the main Northern power, the center of democratic capitalism, and the chief guarantor of world order. Currently, the most vigorous challenge to U.S. ascendancy is coming from the Islamists, while the collectivists (virtually everyone in the "peace" camp) and the forces of chaos (rising regional powers) seem to be investigating the potential to exploit America's distraction. In the longer term, the greatest threat to citizens of the Free World is posed less by disparate terrorist assailants or Islamist ideological beachheads, than by collectivism and chaos, and in this regard Islamic fascism may not deserve its own separate category, but rather may stand as one peculiar collectivism making its own bid for regional (or possibly multi-regional) power. The danger is less that the Muslim armies will come marching through Berlin, London, and Washington than that a forced withdrawal of the US from security responsibilities would inspire other regional powers all around the globe to make similar bids.
In this scenario, the likelihood both of increasingly bloody wars, involving ever more advanced weaponry, and of vast economic disruption would increase to the point that almost anything except for a century remarkably more peaceful than the last one became possible.