Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941. Adolph Hitler was on a rampage across Europe. President Roosevelt asked Congress for a declaration of war against both Japan and Germany and got it. Nearly four years later the United States and her allies were victorious over both enemies. An uneasy peace (that due to the Soviet Empire’s blockade of Berlin, Germany) prevailed until 1950, and then North Korea invaded South Korea. 

The Korean mess wasn’t called a war, it was termed a police action and was the first conflict in which the United States wasn’t allowed to win. President Harry S. Truman insisted that if we took certain actions it would incur the wrath of the Russians and Chinese and would cause an escalation of the conflict. In the end, we left Korea with thousands of troops in place to maintain the peace. (We still maintain troops in that nation.)

Then came the great experiment in Viet Nam which we didn’t win, but could have if a will and the means to win had been exercised. Again, the effort was limited due to not wanting to rile up Hanoi, Russia, and China. The result in Viet Nam was a bit different than Korea. Whereas in Korea, we had a peace agreement of sorts based on the 38^th Parallel, we turned tail and ran from Viet Nam, turning the nation over to the Communists.

Now we are involved in Iraq with an enemy that is less definable than the enemies of the previous conflicts, but they are no less lethal. The problem is that they don’t wear uniforms and aren’t associated with any country, that is officially. But that doesn’t mean that the war with them can’t be won. In order to do so, a resolve to win must be held, driven by the will to use whatever means necessary to bring about victory, and it must be employed even if that means collateral damage to civilians and their infrastructure. The reason being for the foregoing is that the enemy is using the civilians and the infrastructure to implement their carnage just as they have in every war.   

Each of the wars and conflicts has one commonality: The enemy in each case was determined to exercise dominance over the United States using various means to bring it about, and knew full well that by defeating us most of the opposition to the grand schemes would be eliminated. It is argued that Viet Nam posed no danger, but it must be remembered that the enemy was and still is Communism and its goal of expansion throughout the world.    

But WWII and the other conflicts have no commonality other than involving the United States in military action. When Congress declared war on Japan and Germany, politicians for the most part stepped out of the way and allowed the President to do what needed to be done. FDR allowed the military to conduct the war and let the chips fall where they may. He made no apologies and made no concessions to placate dissenters in any nation. Harry Truman approved the two atom bombs delivered to Japan and the war ended quickly. We had the resolve to win and the will to do what was needed to bring about victory.

In Korea, Viet Nam, and now in Iraq, the President and Congress are trying to conduct the war from Washington, effectively limiting the means needed to win. A war cannot be won when those who know nothing about military necessities try to run the show. Yet, we hear the Congressional oafs bleating their nonsense every day, blaming the United States for every imaginable worldly ill.

What a difference from WW II than what we see now. A war managed by Washington has never succeeded and only brings agony and ongoing problems which last for years. In Sorting It Out, the only way to end the Iraq War is to unshackle the military and let them do what needs to be done and let the chips fall where they may. What a difference that will make and the name of that difference will be called Victory.

© 02-05-2007 DEC