Mark,
It is possible to be in the wrong war at the wrong time and the wrong place and I fear that is where we are at now.
If I heard this without knowing where it came from I would think that I was hearing someone quoting an old speech from the failed (I enjoy that word in his case) Presidential aspirant, John F. Kerry.
I am curious what it would take for you to label a war "the right war at the right time in the right place"? After all you have labeled WWII as "failed ("Even the so-called "just war" of World War II failed."). You also denigrate (question?) it's"justness". Nor do you seem very positive about Korea or Vietnam. That would leave, at least in the last century, WWI and Desert Storm. Neither of which we were able to choose ahead of time nor which seemed to solve the problem at hand more than temporarily.
Unfortunately some of your statements seem to make a case for complete inaction because of a fear of consequences (i.e., "Given the complexiites of modern warfare, one can win the war on one level and lose it on an entirely different level."). If that is the case, why not just avoid war all together and let people like Hussein spread their terror and gain strength until they begin to look at our country with the certainty that we are too hesitant to fight.
Well, going into Afghanistan, and then stopping there would be akin to what happened in WWI and Desert Storm. We would win one war but set up the next. My unit was mobilized for Desert Storm and I took 118 people to Germany to help with the logistical pipeline of troops and equipment into and out of the AOR. I then spent the next 13 years helping to deploy and re-deploy people and equipment on almost a scheduled basis as Hussein acted up regularly by various violations of whatever accord ended the fighting. Do you remember "Operation Deny Holidays"? This was the unofficial name for these repeated interuptions where we pulled people from various places and rushed to put out the latest test of our resolve. Much of this revolved around Hussein's refusal to comply with a key provision that he clearly demonstrate that he had destroyed his ability to make WMD's, a capability he never denied.
So I guess we should have done the same thing in 2003-4 and just let Hussein continue to kill his own people cause after all, they weren't our people. And claim victory until the next time.
I hope that I can say this without sounding insulting, but frankly your arguements sound more like a regurgitation of liberal anti-war academia propaganda than an independant and factual analysis of the history of this conflict and the nature of the enemy we have finally faced. Instead you used some rather general claims ("Instead, I'll point my finger at the usual suspects: greed, amibition, ego which afflict our leaders both civilian and military."), wrap yourself in concern for the troops in the fight ("Hopefully, our Iraq War Memorial Wall will have fewer names on it.", and the inevitable anti-Bush jab ("We went into Afghanistan for all the right reasons and Iraq for all of the wrong reasons.").
Every day and every terrorist roadside bombing makes the face of this enemy clearer and clearer. Modern terrorism is a war on our society waged in the most callous and cowardly method possible. Hidden bombs, soft targets, suicide bombers, hiding among the general populace, bombing subways (and other soft targets) in other countries.
Mark, you do put together a seemingly compelling post but in the end your points just do not hold up to close scrutiny. You are of course free to write what you may believe, but you are also then bound to understand that others may disagree with you and point out where you are wrong.
![[wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif "Wink [wink]")
