This article says that question misses the point.
.... Media types, candidates, partisans – all appear to believe these are meaningful questions. They are not. They miss this point: Wars cannot be won by pursuing safety. They can be won only by accepting risks. A little history may help to illustrate.Posted by Ithildin at September 23, 2004 10:27 AM | PROCURE FINE OLD WORLD ABSINTHEIn 1940, the future of freedom looked bleak. The Nazi military machine had easily and swiftly cut down the armed forces of France and Belgium. British troops had to be evacuated from the continent at Dunkirk.
Key advisors to Winston Churchill counseled him to “seek terms” from Hitler. And, uncharacteristically, Churchill considered that option. Finding an “exit strategy” certainly would have made Britain safer.
But, Churchill decided against safety. He decided instead to fight an all-out war against totalitarian extremism. He understood how perilous that would be.
“If this long island story of ours is to end at last,” he said, “let it end only when each one of us lies choking in his own blood upon the ground.” (emphasis mine)
Churchill seems like the kind of leader we could use in this war and in a way his spirit has passed vicariously on to some players in our current struggle. It's just that so many don't seem to realize we are even fighting a war.
Posted by: Penny Silver at September 29, 2004 2:11 PM