This WSJ editorial by Daniel Hettinger clear-sightedly, and with some puzzlement, describes the remarkable defeatism that seems to be spreading throughout the American Congress and public like some easily transmitted virus. Defeatism is the new feel-good emotion; it allows us … Continue reading →
In my recent post about how poorly our own Civil War had been going for the North even as late as the spring of 1864, I mentioned the incredibly high casualties in that war compared to what we’ve suffered so … Continue reading →
Yesterday I wrote about the limitations Congress might face in opposing a “surge” of American troops in Iraq if–as rumor would have it–such a surge is part of Bush’s new Iraq policy to be unveiled next week. Today I read … Continue reading →
Yesterday’s post of mine was linked at Dean Esmay, and my old friend mikeca wrote a critique in the comments section there. I’ve already debated mikeca’s viewpoint about whether or not the South Vietnamese ARVN might have held off against … Continue reading →
Dean Esmay has linked to my second post on Cronkite and Tet, and a commenter there named “mikeca” called what I had to say “revisionist history.” His comment was identical to one he posted on this blog as well, which … Continue reading →
[Part I here.] In his introduction to that Cronkite interview featured in Part I, Dick Gordon writes: It was February 1968, and in a three minute editorial essay on the CBS Evening news Cronkite quite simply changed the course of … Continue reading →
While Bush formulates a new plan for Iraq, and others say all is lost there no matter what, I’m reminded of a famous “all is lost” moment from that ever-festering sore of history, the Vietnam War: Walter Cronkite’s editorial on … Continue reading →
I’ve been reading a book by Robert Kagan entitled Dangerous Nation, about the history of America’s international relations. Kagan’s thesis is that, from the start, the US was more involved and interventionist, and less isolationist, than conventional wisdom would indicate. … Continue reading →
[Part I can be found here.] Shelby Steele, a supporter of the war in Iraq, discusses the semantic and conceptual problem we face when we have no clear definition of victory: Without a description of victory, a war has no … Continue reading →
The ISG report has branded our efforts in Iraq “grave,” “deteriorating,” and “not working.” The American people aren’t too happy with the situation, either. Results of recent polls indicate: Just 9 per cent expect the war to end in clear-cut … Continue reading →
[Please see this post on forgetting Pearl Harbor.] We’ve all learned about Pearl Harbor, but here are some details that I found especially interesting in light of 9/11. Despite having a lot of information that a Japanese attack was coming … Continue reading →
Sixty-five years ago today Pearl Harbor was attacked. That’s long enough ago that only the elderly remember the day and its aftermath with any clarity. Several generations–including my own tiresome one, the baby boomers–have come up since then, and the … Continue reading →