We have traded words like victory and surrender for stalemate and negotiation. Misunderstanding of the purpose of war, we fight battles to bring the enemy to the political table. It seems we prefer to make political adversaries out of our enemies rather than vanquished foes. This sounds magnanimous, but serves against the interests we first entered the conflict over.
When the West forced Israel to make a diplomat out of a terrorist, negotiating with Yasser Arafat, we worked against the goal of defeating the enemies of peace. Instead we negotiated with an opposition that wanted to remove them from the planet. Israel has been at a state of war with its political opponents for 30 years with no end in sight.
We’ve watched in Iraq our brave soldiers fight their way through cities where our “enemies” are killing civilians, our soldiers, and opposing our goal of a free and democratic Iraq. Fighting only to have diplomats negotiate a safe retreat for our enemies under the guise of peace. Rather than securing peace, we secure the lives of those who would take our own. Have we not learned that transforming our mortal enemy into political adversaries will only guarantee our own failure? We have a parallel example with Arafat and Israel. If we follow this pattern in attacking the insurgents, Iraq will suffer the same fate as Israel.
Did we attack Fallujah with the goal of turning insurgent terrorists and murderers of civilians into an Iraqi political movement? If we still have the resolve to win, let us purpose together to see the killers of Americans and Iraqi civilians eliminated as a force, militarily and politically. Nothing short of victory will bring peace to Iraq and nothing short of unconditional surrender should bring an end to our attack.
Louis Kitz
Darrington
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
