wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Dan, I agree with you that most of our soldiers and relief workers are trying to do good in Iraq, despite fantastically inept leadership on the part of the Bush admin. HOWEVER. Please bear in mind a few practical aspects of our involvement in WWII. 1) in WWII, we had viable allies. 2) WWII was not a war of choice that cost us $3 trillion. 3) in WWII we had a draft, and we were not exhausting the resources of our military. 4)in WWII, civilians sacrificed through rations. 5) In WWII, we won in less time than we have been involved in Iraq. What explains #5? See #1, #2 #3, and #4.

I enjoyed the piece about the Candy Bombers, however, I believe that it is both simplistic and disingenuous for Mr. Cherny to imply that the US exercised greater morality and behavior during WWII than we do today. Let's not romanticize the past and over-demonize the present. Read on:

While the Nazis were conquering Europe, rounding up and murdering Jews, Gypsies and others, the US did squat ( until we were attacked that is). We indiscriminately bombed German and Japanese cities - something we don't do today. We here about atrocities like Abu Ghraib because our media is more free to scrutinize the activities of our military - and that's the way it should be but...

Despite the many failures in Iraq, most of our soldiers and relief workers are trying to do good there - build schools, hospitals, and make Iraq a more peaceful country. Just because the rest of the world liked us more during WWII (Remember, we were saving their butts), does not mean that the United States today has slipped morally and needs to look to the past in order to restore our principles. We are as moral and principled as we've ever been, but obviously we could do a lot better.