Yet one reads in the newspapers that various authorities warn that we are in for a situation that may last for decades. In the much less popularly supported conflict in Vietnam, I am personally aware, as one who was consulted, that the President of the United States and his strategic advisers tortured themselves over whether or not to bomb the harbor of Haiphong in North Vietnam, because of the dangers of escalating the war, killing civilians, etc. I repeat that I do not pretend to know the answers to the moral dilemma facing the United States today. Clearly, terrorism is a grave threat. To the degree that it can be held in check, it must be held in check.
Government officials have a grave responsibility and deserve our understanding.
At the same time, as one who spent 27 years of his life serving with the United States Navy and Marine Corps, and considering it a high privilege to do so, I feel compelled to plead that we truly know what we are about in the strategies and tactics we use, and that most particularly we are able to root them in a solid moral justification. I believe that they are eminently applicable and that we have a grave obligation to apply them to any form of warfare in which we plan to engage. Policy planning and military planning are imperative and certainly required of decision-makers well in advance of action. Moral planning, however, is no less imperative and is equally required of decision-makers well in advance of action. I would hope that if our government has not yet done so, it would appeal to scholars of the moral dimensions of warfare to offer their analyses of what we seem to be about as a nation.