forever wars

The title was provocative: Why America Loses Wars. The author, Donald Stoker, has taught at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey. So I read the book...and was profoundly disappointed.

Stoker doesn't like "forever wars." Neither do I. His critique of vague and changing goals in U.S. military operations after 1945 is reasonable. I believe policymakers should think carefully, weigh options, give clear policy guidance, especially to the military, and then frequently reassess whether ends, means, and ways are in balance.

But Stoker seems to believe that limited wars become forever wars. My problem is that unlimited wars can spiral out of control. There are strategic and moral reasons to keep conflicts limited.

Another book I've just read, Austin Carson's Secret Wars, show how often nations collude to keep secret their enemy's covert operations in order to limit escalation. I never knew, for example, that U.S. officials knew that Russian pilots were engaged in Korea but chose not to make that public. Carson, who teaches at the University of Chicago, also shows how American and enemy officials colluded to keep important facts about covert operations secret in the Vietnam and Afghan wars.

Carson's analysis thus provides another reason for keeping wars limited that makes sense to me.