Before I ask my question, let me say that I mean absolutely no disrespect to those who have given their lives in Iraq or Afghanistan. I also mean no disrespect to the families of these brave souls who gave their lives in the cause.

My question is where are we storing the 48,000 plus body bags we have not used yet? If you recall at the outset of the war in Iraq, several members of Congress indicated that we would need 50,000 body bags for the early stages of the war. That was a couple years ago. Thus far we have used something like 1,900 of these. But 48,000 some odd bags takes up a lot of space. So I'm wondering where we have them stored.

I suppose I also wonder what the protesters would have said if we had suffered even 2% of those projected casualties in the first month or two. Would their anger have been as strong as it is now? Does body count have any bearing on the strength of peaceniks' venom? Do the circumstances of any war have any impact? Must the devil be knocking directly at our door before any sort of violence is justified? For example, during World War II, while the Nazis were enslaving, torturing, and killing the Untermenschen (jews, slavs, and others), if they posed no direct threat to the land mass of the United States, why should we ever engage them in battle? Japan obviously attacked our territory but after the initial surprise attack, they might very well have left us alone. They were, after all, working to enslave people on mainland Asia. They might not have been interested in capturing the U.S. So fighting them must be immoral too.

Last night I watched former Secretary of Defense (under Democrats Kennedy and Johnson), Robert McNamara who declared that the U.S. should only act militarily in a unilateral fashion when the 50 states are directly threatened. Besides the fact that McNamara was a thoughtful and erudite speaker, I found his statements about unilateral military action to be almost as wrong as his approach to Vietnam. Under his theory, we would never have engaged Japan even after Pearl Harbor because they did not present any sort of invasion threat. Similarly, we would have allowed Italy and Germany to capture all the middle eastern oil producing nations since they were not then and are not now a part of the 50 states.

The current breed of peaceniks seems to take the same approach as McNamara. Many Democrats do as well. In McNamara's case I suppose you can write this off as a sort of PTSD that leaders are subject to. If you send a bunch of people off to their death following a policy which you later conclude is absolutely wrong, presumably you carry too much guilt for a single person. That is how McNamara strikes me. And the fact that the current liberal peaceniks sound so similar combined with the fact that it was liberals who led us into Vietnam, I suppose maybe we should be kind enough to shuffle these broken people off to a corner where they can receive treatment while the real business of protecting the U.S. takes place.