Empowering Heroes (Part 1): We Need a Plan

By:  Dale Weckbacher

Proverbs 11:14

14 Where there is no counsel, the people fall;

But in the multitude of counselors there is safety.

NKJV

Part of success in any project is planning.  The time to seek counsel on a project is during this planning stage.  Unfortunately, when politicians fight wars, they often jump right in placing troops in harm’s way without considering the formulation of a plan for victory. 

Unfortunately, this has been the process for fighting wars since our troops achieved victory in World War II.  Since then, politicians fight wars using the military as their political pawns.  Troops often fight wars today in the interest of protecting politicians’ political interests instead of to achieve victory over an enemy of the country.  Politicians also micromanage wars instead of allowing the generals on the ground to manage the war.  (1)  This strategy has led to unfinished wars in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and soon Afghanistan. 

In spite of never serving in the military myself, I have always supported the men and women of our military and believe politicians should never send them into combat without first seeking counsel and developing a plan for victory.  A plan for victory must include:

1)      Formulation of a mission statement - The statement must clearly define the purpose for military intervention.  The mission statement must also explain why military intervention is important for national security. 

2)      Defining what constitutes victory – In World War II victory was defined as the destroying the axes powers of Japan, Germany, and Italy.  This clear definition of victory is lacking in wars since World War II.  Without this clear definition of victory, commanders in the field of battle have no idea what the goal of the mission is and just move on from one battle to the next.  Unfortunately, each battle results in more casualties. 

3)      Allowing military leaders in the field of battle to lead – Generals close to the field of battle have a better idea of what the troops need for victory and should have autonomy to make decisions that will best achieve the stated goal of victory.  Unfortunately, politicians in Washington now micromanage wars and all too often make battlefield decisions based on insuring nothing happens that will harm their chances for reelection. 

4)      Supplying troops with the weapons and resources they need for victory – The best mission statement, a clear definition of victory, and strong leadership on the battlefield are useless without the weapons and resources needed for victory.  Unfortunately, when the battle gets tough and there is a need to cut spending to balance the budget, politicians have no problem cutting defense spending leaving our troops lacking the weapons and resources they need to achieve victory. 

There is little doubt that ISIS poses a real threat to our national security.  (2)  With reports of ISIS terrorists possibly crossing our wide open southern border, (3)  we must stop ISIS before they stage terrorist attacks on our soil.  A strategy of keeping them busy in Iraq and Syria fighting for their survival instead of staging attacks on our soil is best.  After all, when we engaged terrorists with our military after 9/11, there were no more attacks on our soil for they were busy fighting for their survival at home.  (4)  Unfortunately, now that we have abandoned that strategy by prematurely pulling out of Iraq, we once again face the very real possibility of another deadly terrorist attack at home. 

There is a clear reason for a mission against ISIS in light of the brutality with which they have retaken much of the territory gained in the War in Iraq.  It is also clear that intervention by the military is vital to national security.  However, Obama has yet to define what constitutes victory and instead believes he can somehow bring ISIS to their knees through pinpoint airstrikes.  (5)  As of the writing of this post, there is much disagreement between the Pentagon and President Obama on the issue of ground troops.  (6)  President Obama needs to read Proverbs 11:14 and heed the counsel of his military experts.  Failure to do this will most likely result in the unnecessary deaths of civilians and troops. 

We must have a plan involving a combination of airstrikes and ground troops as we did in Iraq, causing ISIS to call back their people in the United States to assist them in fighting our ground troops.  This worked after 9/11 and as long as we kept the pressure on the Al Qaeda in Iraq and Afghanistan, no further attacks occurred on our soil.  The difference this time is we have an opportunity to be proactive and prevent an attack on our own soil before it occurs.

Unfortunately, ground wars become ugly and with 24/7 media providing real time coverage of the war, citizens at home witness the horrors of war without complete understanding of what is happening.  Politicians interested in getting the votes of these horrified citizens are all too eager to promise withdrawing troops so they are no longer killed or injured in a failed war caused by their policies. 

In next Saturday’s posting, we will look at how real time media coverage of wars since World War II is hindering the ability of our military to achieve victory. 

1. Lane, Moe. Attention, whoever in the White House monitors this site. Google ‘Lyndon Johnson micromanagement Vietnam.’. www.redstate.com. [Online] Red State, September 17, 2014. [Cited: September 18, 2014.] http://www.redstate.com/2014/09/17/attention-whoever-white-house-monitors-site-google-lyndon-johnson-micromanagement-vietnam/.

2. Hall, Wynton. 7 ISIS FACTS EVERY AMERICAN SHOULD KNOW. www.breitbart.com. [Online] Breitbart News, September 14, 2014. [Cited: September 18, 2014.] http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/09/13/7-ISIS-Facts-Every-American-Should-Know.

3. Kredo, Adam. Dem Rep: 40 American ISIS fighters have already returned to the United States. www.foxnews.com. [Online] Fox News, September 19, 2014. [Cited: September 19, 2014.] http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/09/19/dem-rep-40-american-isis-fighters-have-already-returned-to-united-states/.

4. U.S. Department of State. National Strategy for Combating Terrorism. 2001-2009.state.gov. [Online] U.S. Department of State, September 2006. [Cited: September 18, 2014.] http://2001-2009.state.gov/s/ct/rls/wh/71803.htm.

5. Masi, Alessandria. Does The US Need Ground Forces To Fight ISIS In Iraq, Syria? The Impact Of Airstrikes Vs. Combat Troops. www.ibtimes.com. [Online] International Business Times, September 17, 2014. [Cited: September 18, 2014.] http://www.ibtimes.com/does-us-need-ground-forces-fight-isis-iraq-syria-impact-airstrikes-vs-combat-troops-1690915.

6. Whitlock, Craig. Rift widens between Obama, U.S. military over strategy to fight Islamic State. www.washingtonpost.com. [Online] The Washington Post, September 18, 2014. [Cited: September 19, 2014.] http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/rift-widens-between-obama-us-military-over-strategy-to-fight-islamic-state/2014/09/18/ebdb422e-3f5c-11e4-b03f-de718edeb92f_story.html.