No war is a 'good' war until it's won

Why can't we pick "good" wars anymore? This is a classic example of the Hollywood mentality that is prevalent today in the United States.

World War II was no picnic. We retreated. We advanced. We were slaughtered. We killed civilians. The enemy took thousands of American prisoners. But in the end, we won that war.

The war in Iraq is not a "good" war because we don't seem able to win it as fast as Hollywood, the press, and the "inconvenienced" citizens would like us to. This enemy is different, and the prosecution of this war by the U. S. and its allies is quite different, too.

During World War II, we bombed Germany and Japan and caused thousands of civilian casualties. The two atomic bombs dropped on Japan also caused a tremendous number of civilian deaths in just seconds.

At the time, nobody objected because we were conscious that to win the war, we needed to destroy, to kill indiscriminately. Now the war in Iraq is prosecuted to cause minimal civilian casualties, and if civilians are killed or wounded, we court martial our soldiers.

This atmosphere has been a testament to Vietnam, when politicians decided not to win that war. Liberal politicians, aided by the liberal media, now are also engaged in defeatism, which may cost us our future stability and freedom.

But this "inconvenient" war, for many, must be won by the military without interference if we wish to secure our future and that of our children and grandchildren.

Emilio F. Marcos

Geneva