Imagine the following conversation:

'Colonel, you want to take your tank column through that gap on the enemy flank, turn in behind them and cut them off from the rail-head.'

'I can't do that, General!'

"Why not?'

'Nazis make flank attacks, Sir! Nazis curl in behind and cut off soldiers from supply and retreat! I'm not going to act like a Nazi! We're better than that. Sir!'


The conversation is not a whit more ridiculous than placing moral posturing in the political arena above sound strategy and tactics. Fights are not supposed to be fair, the goal is to make a fight as unbalanced as possible in your favor, both before you begin it and while you conduct it.

We are better than they are because our goals are better. Not because we refuse to use means known to be effective in manipulating public opinion. That just cedes the field to the enemy, who won't even give you a little kiss for the assistance.

"A liberal may be defined as a man who won't take his own side in a quarrel."


"Defeat of a dangerous enemy is something to be for."