The editors of National Review have a great piece up today about the course of the war to date. The editors refer to yet another assessment of the war, by the great military historian, John Keegan. For me, the key remark in Keegan’s analysis is his point about the troop dearth being a relatively minor problem, not only because more troops are on the way, but also because “Iraqi weakness prevents Saddam from profiting from the miscalculation.” That is why this relatively minor and correctable problem nonetheless holds an important lesson for the future. Against a more powerful enemy–say, North Korea or China–committing too few ground troops would be a far more serious error. So as NR’s editors and John Keegan say, this war is a great success. Yet the lesson is clear. In the current environment, the downsizing of our conventional forces, and especially of our ground troops, has gone too far.