The al-Qaeda leader in Iraq has one. And I wonder in this column whether the U.S. strategy is superior – as it needs to be.

Here’s a cogent letter I just received in response:

Mr. May,
I am a retired Navy Commander, formerly an A-6 Intruder bombardier/navigator. I heartily applaud your column. My friends and I have been saying for at least 2 years that our strategy in Iraq is flawed. The impression our strategy leaves on the American people seems to be to “paint with one hand, and shoot with the other.” Most of our losses have been driving down the roads on patrols and traveling from one U.S. base to another. This leaves the people with the impression that our men are being wasted, not in combat, but in “peacekeeping.” The Bush administration itself seems confused, not comfortable in calling it a “war”, but slipping into calling the “war on terror” the “global struggle against violent extremism.” Of course, Bush put Rumsfeld and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs back in their place by insisting we are in fact “at war”, but we who are perceptive know that we are fighting a very weak “war.” Yes, the “war on terror” is unique, but I laugh when Bush says “we have the terrorists on the run all over the world.”
Anyway, I loved your article, I think it’s the first conservative column pointing out that we have an ineffective strategy in Iraq. Most conservatives are so busy bashing the extreme left in defense of all things Bush, that they fail to honestly critique what the administration is really doing. Thanks for a great article.