As I said, just because the military is engaged in a project doesn’t make that project a good idea.

If, as you admit in response to my first question, there is no obvious alternative to the continuation of the present course of action in Iraq, then are not critics of the war making worse what they already consider to be a bad situation? As military historians have stated repeatedly, the key military assets are psychological. Guns and technology, in the absence of espirit de corps and the will to sustain losses, do not guarantee victory.

At a minimum, criticism of the war in Iraq should be constructive.

1) Obviously, the only truthful answer is that I don’t know what course of action the U.S. should adopt. As far as my opinion on National Security, I think it is important first to recognize our limitations. We are learning in Iraq that conducting a war followed by nation building is more costly and difficult by far than was expected by some. Given this, it seems to be more practical to avoid this option when there are others available. I am a proponent of the United States using our tremendous power and influence to be an example and a partner with the rest of the world. People who admire you don’t want to kill you.

2) It’s a little more complex than “opposition to the war ha[s] a negative effect on troop morale.” If I decide to undertake a project, and my neighbor thinks it is a stupid project, and tells me so, that will make me feel bad. It is important, though, to remember that my neighbor may also be correct. To expand on this, the fact that pointing out the problems of the Iraq War makes the troops sad is not the end of it. The Iraq War seems, to many people, like a terrible idea, one that is killing and wounding young Americans for no clear benefit. If one of these people is an elected official, their job is to speak out about it.

The military has a dual identity that makes this a more complicated matter. On the one hand it is a group of individuals, most of whom are admirable, courageous, and brave. On the other hand, it is the means by which we as a nation project force into the world. It is entirely possible that the civilian leadership could try to use the military in a stupid, dangerous way, and that this could result in needless loss of life. That this might be the case does not take away from the virtue of the individuals, but their virtue, by the same token, does not necessarily mean that anything they do is a good idea.

Two questions: (1) Even if military intervention in Iraq was a mistake, what course of action should the U.S. adopt on a going forward basis consistent with national security? (2) Given that opposition to the war does have a negative effect on troop morale, do elected officials who oppose the war in Iraq owe any duty to the troops and the country in how they express their critical comments?