SANDRA D. OR SNOOP D.?
REGARDING Robert Kagan and William Kristol's "A Perfect Failure" (Dec. 11): I wonder why no one in a position of authority, influence, or responsibility considered asking even one of the following to join the study group: William Kristol, Robert and Frederick W. Kagan, Charles Krauthammer, Victor Davis Hanson, David Pryce-Jones, and Paul Johnson. And why were there no servicemen on the commission? It would have been wise to include some enlisted troops, both senior and junior, from the Army and Marine Corps, along with some officers and generals who have served two or more tours of duty in Iraq. They certainly would have devised far better recommendations than Iraq Study Group members Vernon Jordan, Leon Panetta, and Sandra Day O'Connor, who bring absolutely no relevant experience to a serious matter.
In fact, the United States would have been better off asking Paris Hilton, Snoop Dogg, and the Dixie Chicks to serve on the ISG. At least they would have brought some levity to the report, and, in the end, no one would have taken seriously what they said (except, perhaps, the New York Times). The president would have been able to get on with doing what needs to be done--that is, winning the war, helping the Iraqis to mold Iraq into a stable democracy, and showing the Islamofascists that we mean business and are not about to go away until we have finished the job.
I pray that we will have the strength and courage as a nation to win in Iraq. If we don't, we will ultimately have to fight battles not of our choosing on many other fronts. If we lose this one, we are finished as a nation, and the strength of our word will be as useless as several of the members of the ISG.
RICHARD MASTIO
Carmel, Calif.
FIRING TIME
THOUGH WILLIAM J. STUNTZ makes an important point that strategy may require a nation to raise its stakes even on what seems to be a bad hand, he misses a critical aspect of President Abraham Lincoln's execution of the Civil War ("Doubling Down in Iraq," Nov. 20). During 1861, 1862, and much of 1863, tactical victories on the battlefield were discouragingly rare and often of minimal strategic value even when won. But when federal armies lost battles, Lincoln fired generals. Sometimes he even fired winning generals who failed to follow tactical victories with meaningful strategic advances. That crucible ruined the careers of dozens of honorable officers. But it gave Lincoln the generals--Grant and Sherman--who would win the war.
Stuntz says that the only way America can lose the war is to fold; he would have us "call and raise" now, but doubling down without drawing a new hand of Pentagon officials and general officers will drive us from the table just as surely and just as quickly as folding. First, find leaders who can win. Then raise the stakes to back them.
R. SCOTT ROGERS
Alexandria, Va.
PAPAL-BACK NOVELS
BROOKE ALLEN's "A Burnt-Out Case" (Dec. 4) cites George Orwell's claim that Roman Catholics, except a few bad ones, cannot be good novelists. But who cannot see that Orwell's perspective is based on his agnostic views, which, naturally, are at odds with a Catholic vision of reality? In fact, I can name more than a few Catholics who were better novelists than Orwell. True, these Catholics have not been canonized, but so far as I know--allowing for the fact that I am not God--they were, or are, "good Catholics": namely, Flannery O'Connor, Walker Percy, J.F. Powers, Francois Mauriac, Sigrid Undset, and Ron Hansen.
JOHN LORANGER
Sparks, Nev.