To the Editor:
David Brooks’s column seems to presume that a military solution in Afghanistan is appropriate. This is also prevalent among those who wage war for a living—whether fighting or building and selling armaments.
The military requests what it requires to achieve military objectives, whether those objectives resolve greater problems or not. That’s tactical—and that’s the military’s job.
The president’s job is to carefully weigh our national interests and then order the tactics necessary to achieve them. It is refreshing to have a president actually invest time and intellectual effort, circumspectly formulating a plan of action and not just surrounding himself with “the smartest military experts” or “retired officers.”
If the solution truly is military, so be it. If not, we shouldn’t send our kids off to die for it. Tenacity is appropriate only when one is on a proper course—not heading toward a cliff.
David L. Wolf
Waterford, Mich., Oct. 30, 2009
Note from KBJ: While I agree with the letter writer that it's the president's job to formulate strategy and the military's job to implement it, I detest the letter writer's jab at President Bush. Where is the evidence that President Bush didn't "invest time and intellectual effort" in prosecuting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? Maybe that's just it: To Bush haters, no evidence is necessary. Just say whatever you want about him and your fellow progressives will accept it.
Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D. 