I agree there is no morality in war. However, there is a moral imperative to justify the intrace and execution of that war.

In WW I, we justified are entry into a war that violated Geo. Washington's injunction to avoid foreign entanglements, because we were fighting a war to end all wars..sounded good then and now.

In WWII, we had no choice. We were attacked by a richer stronger military nation (Japan) and Germany declared war on us to uphold their mutual defense treaty with Japan. WWII changed the US and the world forever.

Korea was to counter an invasion by an agressor against an innocent neighbor.

The Maine may well have been blown up by William Randolph Hearst to boost circulation. Unjust war that we acquired the liability of Puerto Rico as a prize.

Bay of Pigs was a surrogate war conducted by weekend warriors with disasterous results.

Point is we are entering a war where we lack the moral imperative. Iraq has a very tenuous link to 9-11 so find an alternate excuse. Granted Saddam and his sons are baaad people. Does the US go around invading every country with jerks as leaders?

At the Naval Academy the required course on the art of war featured tracts by Lao Tsu, George Kennan, and Carl von Clausewitcz. Don't see this one doing anything other than confirming that "war is a continuation of politics by other means." In short, war is a political failure.

From a political standpoint this war gives us very little to gain and much to lose. We can only hope this is not the potential that will be realized.

I didn't mention Viet Nam because enough stong feelings have been generated over the justification of that one.

At this point, all we can do is hope for the best. This doesn't constitute an approval for another bad war.

Publius