is that people die. The longer the fighting continues, the greater the death total. The proven best method for ending the killing is to win the war quickly and decisively. Look at the monumental absurdity of World War I. Both sides bled each other dry with one stupid frontal assault after another, killing millions of people with no end in sight. Who knows how much longer it would've dragged on and how many more would've died had the US not entered the war in 1917.

From the 1950s through 1975, North Vietnamese forces tried to capture the South. As the war dragged on, an estimated 2 million Vietnamese died, most because of American actions.

From 1979 through the mid 1980s, the Soviet Union tried to subdue Afghanistan. Hundreds of thousands died and in the end, Afghanistan was left in chaos. The US went in and overthrew the Taliban in a matter of weeks. While some innocents were killed in the process, far fewer people have died since than were dying on a regular basis under the Taliban.

In the 1980s, Iran and Iraq fought a bitter war for some 8 years. Neither side was powerful enough or competitent enough to win. In the end, at least a million people died. This year, America swept through Iraq in 3 weeks. Yes, some innocent people died and others have died since, but under Saddam thousands of people were being executed each year. That killing has stopped.

Gandhi once said, "What difference does it make to the dead... whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy?"

That's a nice sentiment. However, stopping the killing is the ultimate goal. By removing Saddam from power, far fewer people in Iraq have died this year than were lost year after bloody year under his rule. To those who weren't killed this year and to those who won't have to die in future years, the painful sacrifaces of this year may indeed be worth it.