But isn't this an overreaction? You are at war but with a much, much smaller nation that has comparatively little military capabilities compared to yourselves.
I believe the british held this idea once and got themselves kicked out of the colonies.....America, 1770's
The only other 'war' going on is less a war and more of an ongoing struggle - terrorists.
This is another form of warfare,a tactic. And it somewhat levels the playing field. Tactics are just as important as strength. Take the revolutionary war. We fought it differently than you did. Back then it was basicly line up nose to nose and fire on command. We hid behind trees and set up ambushes. When we did line up we fired first at a greater distance because we had rifles with longer barrels and the first rifling. They shot further and a little more accurately. Cornwallace was slow to change.
Another example you will find in WWII, was in the air. Fighters had different characteristics. We fought to the strengths of our equipment,a tactic. Why? it neutralizes the other guys strengths. Also the standing order in the Battle of Britain was go after the bombers and ignore the fighters. Another tactic.
One of the many things we have to do is adjust our tactics to counter their's, and we may be doing that now.
Wars are never simple to fight. And not pretty. Someone always gets hurt.
The best defence here is intelligence -
It will take a little time to bring this one up to speed.
In short, I don't think it is overreaction. It is prudent action.
Enough from this long winded old goat.