The Powell Doctrine reviewed

• 
  Is a vital US interest at stake?
• 
  Will we commit sufficient resources to win?
• 
  Are the objectives clearly defined?
• 
  Will we sustain the commitment?
• 
  Is there reasonable expectation that the public and Congress will support the operation?
• 
  Have we exhausted our other options?
• 
  Do we have a clear exit strategy?

Here are my words in reviewing the Powell Doctrine.

• 
  Only act in the U.S. national interest.
• 
  The frictions and factions in the world distract U.S. citizens as to national interest.
• 
  Educated fools and those who over-intellectualize confuse us as to national interest.
• 
  Media reporting appeals to our American instincts to “make it better“.
• 
  The world is busier than what is reported. Some of what is not reported is about the U.S. national interest. I offer as an example the criminal activities of some nation-states. Another example is the abuse of western respect for nation states by nation states that are controlled by tribal and criminal elements with low respect or concept of a nation state.
• 
  Backing off to put things in perspective is always best. Myopic media reports take perspective away, especially as to U.S. national interest.
• 
  Emotion and good intentions are bad paths to be on and to follow.
• 
  Screw me once, shame on you. Screw me twice, shame on me. Do not succumb to fighting war on the cheap. It is always a long term mistake. Attempts to minimize causalities always cause more causalities in the end. If we can’t take up front casualties for political reasons, then don’t get involved. Tolerate the alternative.
• 
  Support of the Congress is one thing. Support of the American people is everything. The astute senior military leader will gage both before agreeing to a military commitment to war. Early retirement or a forced resignation with later public opinions is honorable when acting in the national interest as perceived by the senior military leader.
• 
  Planning to win the peace is mandatory. Planning to win the war seems easy in comparison. Civilian leaders who do not discuss how to win the peace when recommending war are lacking, or in a hurry.
• 
  There are no bad soldiers, only bad leaders. One analogy is that of the US auto industry decline in the last 30 years. Those who blamed lazy American workers missed the auto leaders who drove the industry down. Foreign auto companies and their leaders moved into the gap, and look at the high quality cars American workers make today. Wars are won, and lost, by leaders, not soldiers.
• 
  A Declaration of War is mandatory. If Congress will not pass a declaration, then we should not be involved.
• 
  There are no experts at the beginning of a war. There are experts at the end. There is no school for political leaders fighting wars. Success in prosecuting war in the U.S. national interest comes to those prepared. Failure works for those not prepared. Will and perseverance always win out over good intentions and brains. War is not a “zero defects” game. Like a boxing match, getting back up and learning by mistakes is a big advantage.