How Wars are ultimately won

How wars are ultimately won.

By R.J. Godlewski*

I had fully intended to dodge any new articles today so that I could undertake that most human of all activities – running errands. However, as the nation is at war, I find that I must make my own sacrifices, even if it is that seemingly simplest and “meaningless” of tasks: keeping the public informed. And what has caused me to shirk my personal duties in favor of the keyboard? Our war. Not an original topic, I agree, but one that cannot be overstated or ignored.

Like most people, I start my day by reviewing the news, reading political commentaries from around the planet and, perhaps unlike most people, giving thanks to God that I’ve been blessed with just one more day in which to read political commentaries, let the dog outside, or even, yes, run monotonous errands to support my daily life. Impeding all of this, of course, is the war itself. Which war exactly, you ask? Take your pick. The war in Iraq against the (mostly) Iranian-supported insurgents; the war in Afghanistan against the Taliban; the Global War on Terror against al-Qaeda and their copycats, allies, and other radicals; the war against those who think that we’re the ones who are doing evil; war against the global media who is doing their best to thwart international security; the war against an apathetic public who only desires a fine paycheck and a finer meal on the table; or the war against our on again, off again allies who are the first to call for our aid and the first to abandon us when times get difficult. Like I said, take your pick.

Now I’m a simpleton, I admit. I don’t look at the concept of wars; I look at the broader context of war. Either we exist within a state of war, or we exist within a state of peace (the “fulfillment of war”). Peace is easy to define: the existence of national security, prosperity, public freedoms, and the lack of aggression from outside influences. So, too, is war: the lack of any of the foregoing. Of course people will always try to muddle with these simplistic definitions. That’s what people do better than anything else – take the simple and screw it over so bad that it takes legions of philosophers, clergy, politicians, educators, and armchair analysts to decipher. Like I said, I’m a simpleton: war is war and peace is the lack thereof.

Of course, if I was Alexander the Great I’d be on the frontlines fighting this battle instead of merely writing about it. So, friends, it does our effort no great service by stating what I would do. Too many people are saying things already when they have no basis doing so. I’m a civilian; civilians should oversight the military, not manage wars. However, I propose to reflect upon what wars in the past required to be won, as these are plainly available within the context of human history. So let’s take a quick tour of what we need to win our war:

Decisiveness. No war can be won by the timid. No war should be fought without the maximum effort afforded by a nation’s combined resources. Unfortunately, most wars are launched with the hope and expectation of their being waged honorably and the effort short-lived. This is problem Numero Uno; anytime that battle is commenced in a half-assed manner, things don’t go as well as the military would like.

During the American Civil War, both sides expected rapid capitulation of the other. What the Confederacy had that the Union lacked was spirit – at least at first. This resulted in their victories early on in the conflict. In fact, from 1861 on halfway through 1864 the Union was pretty much losing. The public wanted the war over and ‘Now!’ Fortunately, President Abraham Lincoln knew the Union needed victory and he installed a raving drunkard to command his forces who, in turn, installed a raving lunatic (by many accounts) to spearhead the drive through the heart of the South. Generals Grant and Sherman were, at first glance, ill-suited to wage war but what they shared was an uncanny ability to win. They didn’t appease the enemy. They didn’t negotiate with the enemy. They vanquished the enemy. Even the terms of the eventual surrender were no less decisive in their simplicity: “Take your men and your guns and go home.”

During the Second World War there were many examples of the conflict between decisive and indecisive commanders, but the example that I would like to address is that of General George Patton and Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery. Hot-headed and resolute Patton was an affront to the prim and proper Montgomery, but he got the job done – he bulldozed his troops through the opposition. Montgomery, on the other hand, as befitting someone with the title of Field Marshal (Sounds like a university band member, doesn’t it?), was a great organizer and ‘planner’ like his equal General George McClellan of the American Union. Unfortunately, peace is organized. Wars aren’t. Rough and unbearable Patton knew this and literally led his forces into victory. We need to be just as decisive today.

Commitment. One cannot be decisive without being committed. When President Harry Truman agonized over the decision to drop the atomic bomb on Japan during World War II, he considered the two options before him. Either he could unleash the awesome power of the atom upon his opponents, or he could unleash his overwhelming military upon the island nation. Either way, the end result would’ve been decisive victory for the Americans. Yet, Truman was committed to ending the conflict as soon as possible. His decision to literally vaporize Hiroshima and Nagasaki showed the emperor that the United States could step onto the next plateau. It was an astounding statement that “We have yet begun to fight!” that carried on the truest tradition of John Paul Jones from the fledgling democracy. It also planted a seed into the mind of the Soviets that America – like its most successful generals – was just ‘insane’ enough to go head to head with anyone and win.

We need to be just as committed to our war today. Ours is a nation unmatched by any other. We have the brainpower and the sheer force necessary to vanquish any adversary, especially the ragtag group of terrorists bent on ‘bettering’ the world through diabolical adaptations of historically peaceful religions. They haven’t really waked the “sleeping giant” but we’d better. We need to get our entire population motivated behind the effort inasmuch as both Roosevelt and Truman did during the Second World War. We, as then, need the entire infrastructure of Hollywood, the media, the population, and academia behind in our effort. No compromises mean no surrenders.

Allies. All combatants need allies if for no other reason than to shore up their position – both militarily and politically – and we have been blessed with some great allies in the past. The problem is, however, that most of our allies were people who needed our assistance. Both Britain and France begged for our help during World War II – without which they would be speaking German today. The French demanded that we bypass practical military strategy to save Paris from being burned by a pissed off Hitler. Will Europeans be so inclined to aid our cities in the context of nuclear terrorism? Probably not; they’re having a hell of a time securing their own cities from the radical Islamists. Capitulation has been their first course of action, not necessarily something that we want or need.

We need allies in this war, not dependents. The fundamental benefit of war is strength. That of peace; prosperity. We should not squander either on those ‘allies’ that will turn and run in the face of danger or adversity. Neither should we waste our attention on those nations that don’t subscribe to the ‘American Way’ – namely; hard work, discipline, and freedom for all. Consider how President Bush was welcomed by the Italians and Albanians. The latter had the cost of freedom fresh in their minds; they weren’t spoiled as were the Italians whose prosperity was earned by those who came long before. Those who survive at the expense of others’ efforts are not allies – they’re freeloaders – and they don’t belong in our stable of friends.

Resources. When hockey players decide to duke it out, the first thing that they do is drop their gloves. This is because the ‘frail’ fist is much more effective in dropping their opponent than the security of the padded glove. We sealed the fate of Imperial Japan by using the brutal power of the atom over the much more padded theory of invasion. We threw the “gloves off” in that conflict by maximizing the use of the ‘frail’ science of physics because we wanted to end the struggle, not prolong the agony to no effect. Wars are routinely won by those nations that desire to throw their entire military at the opponent.

Today, we’re paying the price for the 1990’s mentality of savoring the ‘peace dividend’ exposed by the collapse of the Soviet Union. What we selfishly undertook for the sake of economic orgy sacrificed our military to fight the “Long War” with a force a fraction of the size that existed during the 1980’s and now, besides our terrorist enemies, we are confronted by an emerging China and a resurgent Russia. Had we kept our forces intact, our economy might have had a less than meteoric (but perhaps more controlled?) rise but our present war would’ve been far shorter. If there is any fault with our country, it is that our people suffer from pragmatic myopia.

If we were to use the same level of effort in war that we exert in ‘peacetime’, we wouldn’t have the turmoil that we see within the Middle East today. Wars are rarely spectator sports, but they are never, ever hobbies. We must maximize the contribution from industry, academia, and the public if we are to remain as the undisputed superpower. Anything less than absolute effort is suicidal. Just as we must take antibiotics “as prescribed” to fight infection, we must fight our wars until completion. Otherwise, all that we’ll accomplish is to create a more “resistive strain” of enemy.

I have very briefly touched upon the basics for winning wars. There are others, but if we could only devote our attention to those identified above, we will not lose in any conflict. What’s more; acting on the above will permit us to survive long enough to do those simple “errands” that are paramount to the existence of a peaceful and prosperous existence. Of course, if we truly desire a safe and clean house, we must first dispose of the trash.