Lessons from MacArthur

I love to quote Douglas MacArthur. So in light of the Dems failure to support the war and the Presidents desire to win, despite mistakes, or changes in the course of the war, allow me to quote a general who know a little about war.

It was close; but that's the way it is in war. You win or lose, live or die — and the difference is just an eyelash.
To Gen. Richard Sutherland after their flight over Japanese held territory to reach Australia (1942-03-17)

He was not notified of Truman's will to invade Korea, much like the Generals of toaday cry about not being told by Bush of Iraq's invasion and then just like the insurgents, China stepped in to help:

While I was not consulted prior to the President's decision to intervene in support of the Republic of Korea, that decision from a military standpoint, proved a sound one, as we hurled back the invader and decimated his forces. Our victory was complete, and our objectives within reach, when Red China intervened with numerically superior ground forces.

After facing the threat of China being involved, much like the insurgents and Iran helping to oppose our soldiers, he realized that sometimes a change in course is necessary.

While no man in his right mind would advocate sending our ground forces into continental China, and such was never given a thought, the new situation did urgently demand a drastic revision of strategic planning if our political aim was to defeat this new enemy as we had defeated the old.We could hold in Korea by constant maneuver and in an approximate area where our supply line advantages were in balance with the supply line disadvantages of the enemy, but we could hope at best for only an indecisive campaign with its terrible and constant attrition upon our forces if the enemy utilized its full military potential. I have constantly called for the new political decisions essential to a solution.

He would go on to say, and this is most important:

Efforts have been made to distort my position. It has been said, in effect, that I was a warmonger. Nothing could be further from the truth. I know war as few other men now living know it, and nothing to me is more revolting. I have long advocated its complete abolition, as its very destructiveness on both friend and foe has rendered it useless as a means of settling international disputes. ... But once war is forced upon us, there is no other alternative than to apply every available means to bring it to a swift end.
War's very object is victory, not prolonged indecision. In war there is no substitute for victory.
There are some who, for varying reasons, would appease Red China. They are blind to history's clear lesson, for history teaches with unmistakable emphasis that appeasement but begets new and bloodier war. It points to no single instance where this end has justified that means, where appeasement has led to more than a sham peace. Like blackmail, it lays the basis for new and successively greater demands until, as in blackmail, violence becomes the only other alternative.

He also knew that the media is important in framing public opinion, which is vital to any war effort:

One cannot wage war under present conditions without the support of public opinion, which is tremendously molded by the press and other forms of propaganda.

Maybe we should look back and learn from great man and leader.