As the US this Memorial Day honors those who died in their wars, for many it will raise the inevitable question: Has it been worth it?
In stark terms, how many mothers and fathers in the US have asked themselves in the dark of night, their heads on tear-stained pillows, was it necessary for our son or daughter to die fighting for the country? Is the nation any more secure for his or her ultimate sacrifice?
For those who remember the 405,399 Americans killed fighting the Axis powers in World War II, the answer is most likely an easy “yes” because the Germans, Italians and Japanese of the 1930s and 1940s threatened to drive Western civilization back into the Dark Ages. The US and their allies saved the Western world.
Only five years after World War II, however, 54,246 Americans died in the Korean War. Although those hostilities ended in a truce that persists today, the US and the UN notified the Soviet backers of the North Korean aggressors that Moscow’s expansionist plans would be thwarted. The Cold War ensued.
In Vietnam, where 58,220 Americans were killed and 103,284 were wounded from 1954 to 1973, the answer to the central question is more contentious. Despite the courage and dedication of those who fought there, the US was divided as it had not been since the Civil War and was eventually defeated. An argument still rages today among the Vietnam generation as to whose fault that was.
Perhaps the greatest tragedy of the US involvement in Vietnam is that the outcome didn’t make much difference; the US is no more or less secure today than it might have been had the war never been fought. Communist Vietnam does not threaten the US or its allies or friends and US interests in Southeast Asia proceed without hindrance.
Following the war in Vietnam, the US was engaged in a series of skirmishes, each of which took a small toll. Even so, the deaths of the men and women who died in Iran (eight), Grenada (12), Lebanon (265), Panama (18), the Persian Gulf (383) and Somalia (43) were no less painful for their families and continued to raise the central question.
Now the US is fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, with casualties reported daily by name. As of last week, 4,404 Americans, including 108 women, had been killed in Iraq and 1,076, including 20 women, had died in Afghanistan. That means that nearly 5,500 families are mostly likely asking themselves: Is the US more secure for the death of our son or daughter?
It must be harder to answer that question today because the armed forces of the US are fighting those wars alone. Former US president George W. Bush and US President Barack Obama alike have asserted that the US is a nation at war, which is patently untrue. The Army and Marine Corps, and to a lesser extent the Navy and Air Force, are at war, but the rest of the nation for the most part goes about life as if Iraq and Afghanistan did not exist.
Senator James Webb was a decorated Marine in Vietnam and later wrote a book, Fields of Fire, about that war, a passage from which applies to Americans fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
A Marine sergeant reporting in from the US tells his platoon leader: “Lieutenant, you’d hardly know there was a war on. It’s in the papers, and college kids run around screaming about it instead of doing panty raids or whatever they were doing before, but that’s it. Airplane drivers still drive their airplanes. Businessmen still run their businesses. College kids go to college. It’s like nothing really happened, except to other people. It isn’t touching anybody except us.”
The sergeant had it exactly right, then and now.
Richard Halloran is a freelance writer in Hawaii.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers