We know what the Cold War was, but why do you think it was called the "Cold" War? Was it even a "War"?
- Robert Dallin, Saint Leo
---
Bob -
The decades-long battle of wits between the former Soviet Union and United States that began immediately after World War II might be termed "cold" in that a state of war was between the two was never formally declared. Instead, US and Soviet governments and their allies began to wage what would become a convoluted and dangerous series of chess matches on a global playing field.

Offensive methods ranged from standard espionage and demonizing propaganda (parasitic capitalists and atheist commies substituting nicely for vanquished japs and krauts) to assassinations, civil wars and high-stakes chicken fights. The ever-present threat of mutual nuclear annihilation kept both parties (and the majority of observers) in some degree of check at all times.

Even after the fall of the Berlin Wall and subsequent Soviet dissolution, it's my opinion that the "Cold War" remains far from over. The alliances and enemies formed during the preceding half century persist. In the earliest days of our current President's invasion of Afghanistan, for example, it was noted that the vast majority of the enemy's weaponry had been provided by the United States during that country's battle against invading Soviet forces some years before.

Do the actions of the United States and Russian allies constitute war? Probably, though I do think it rather ironic that in an age where everything else seems to exist in an increasing state of hyperspeed, war should be waged in slow motion. With the Ultimate Weapon aimed between your eyes like a coiled snake, perhaps very slowly is the only way to proceed. If I can find fault with anything, it would have to be the "cold" part.

I'm not much good at coining phrases, but perhaps "Slow Truce" will catch on.
- DCd