I base my opinion on my experiences, both in the military during the Cold War and as a student of military history for more than 30 years.

The Cold War went on for over 40 years. The general policy of the US and our allies was one of containment. We believed that if we could keep communism from spreading, it would eventually collapse under its own weight. On the other side, the communists believed that capitalism would eventually collapse when the people rose against it. Both sides fought the Cold War as a type of global chess game.

During the Cold War, direct military action was avoided between the superpowers. Yes, we did have casualties such as the dozens of airmen who were shot down on reconnaissance missions. Instead of direct conflict, the superpowers fought wars by proxy. We fought against communism in Korea and Vietnam. They fought to maintain or impose their will in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Afghanistan, and other counties. They sent men and material to oppose us in our wars and we did the same for theirs. However, both sides were careful to avoid direct military conflict. We fought each other by proxy.

In a similar vein, we did "fight" on other fronts like humanitarian efforts. The Marshall Plan rebuilt Europe to prevent war ravaged nations from turning to communism. The Peace Corps helped show Americans as the good guys to millions of people around the world. In these respects, the coming war on terrorism will be similar to the Cold War.

A limited amount of intelligence sharing did take place during the Cold War primarily between the US and UK. Even then, there was a lot of information that was never shared due to concerns about security compromise like what happened with Kim Philby. Many of our most sensitive "national technical means of verification" (technical term for spy satellites and other assets) were shared only on an infrequent basis. Even our Canadian partners in NORAD aren't allowed to see everything.

Even at the height of the Cold War, there was a measure of cooperation between the super powers. For example, the Space Surveillance Center in Cheyenne Mountain keeps track of everything above 10cm in diameter in space. Several times a week, something reenters from space. For decades, if the SSC determined an object was going to reenter over the Soviet Union, they notified them to avoid any possibility the object might be confused with a warhead. There were actually several protocols between the US and Soviet Union on matters like this. You're not likely to see anything like that between us and the terrorist organizations.

This building war on terrorism is a different kind of war. Even Cold War opponents like Russia and China have expressed cautious support for our actions. There seems to be a fair chance that US military forces may be based in former Soviet republics. That never happened during the Cold War.

Russia and even China see supporting us, even if it's limited support, as being in their own interest. Russia has had a problem with terrorism for some time and China fears Islamic fundamentalism in their own territory. Russia has announced they will send support to the Northern Alliance in an effort to topple the Taliban. Far from being Cold War opponents, it looks like we're going to be Allies in this effort.

Many other nations also see that they are just as vulnerable as we are to terrorism. I don't seriously expect them other than perhaps Great Britain to send military forces to the war but each has their own intelligence assets they can contribute. In addition, they can cooperate in other ways like helping shut down the money flow to terrorist organizations.

Capturing someone like Milosevic to put on trial is a different matter from capturing the head of a terrorist organization. Milosevic is a former head of state who made no attempt to hide in a nation occupied by NATO forces. Osama bin Laden lives in the shadows and caves of a remote country with the apparent protection of the local government. It seems likely that the only way we'll ever get our hands on bin Laden is if we can pressure those harboring them to turn him over to us or unless a snatch mission is successful. IMO, neither seems likely to succeed.

If stopping international terrorism is even possible, it'll have to be a multi-pronged effort where military force is but one component. I think it's unlikely that we'll see large ground forces like we used in the Gulf War. Instead, I suspect we'll use Special Forces to fight in the shadows where terrorists live. Most of the time, we probably won't even hear about what is going on. We aren't likely to go bombing Afghan cities except perhaps to hit key Taliban assets. In the two weeks following the attacks, we have not struck back yet. We're carefully choosing our targets as we work to build international support.