Engulfed in memories of World War II from the recent dedication of the new monument on the Mall in Washington and the 60th anniversary of D-Day, President Bush may be wondering how his invasion of Iraq will be viewed in history.
There is an enormous difference between the U.S. involvement in World War II -- which began in response to the Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941 -- and the administration's long-planned preemptive strike on Iraq on March 19, 2003.
But the sacrifices demanded of American soldiers are the same in every war. They are asked to lay down their lives for the country's cause. For that they should have an understanding of the need for the war and an ultimate trust in their government.
Those who fought in World War II had that trust and a sense of mission. In that war, American GIs had no doubt about their mission and they could count on the credibility of their leaders.
We had 16 million men and women in uniform ready to serve back then. Millions more stayed home and worked the factories and farms to turn out the tanks and planes and food needed to win the war.
"Rosie the riveter" personified the role of women. Women left their homes to fill the jobs of the men who joined the armed forces. They ferried planes across the country, drove trucks and filled many vacant professional slots.
In fact, every home in America was affected. The nation was totally mobilized behind the war effort. Dissent was rare.
The picture is not the same when one looks at the war in Iraq.
We now know that the reasons given by the Bush administration to invade Iraq have turned out to be false. There are no weapons of mass destruction to be found, no pre-war Baghdad ties to al-Qaida terrorists and no imminent threat to the United States.
We have had to re-learn the lessons of the Vietnam War -- that we cannot occupy a country for long without paying a heavy price.
The Iraqi war was a foreign policy blunder of incredible proportions that has taken more than 800 American lives, with thousands more wounded.
The United States doesn't count the Iraqi dead or wounded but they are reported to be in the many thousands.
The toll will go even higher if Bush insists on keeping more than 100,000 troops in Iraq after elections there in January.
It's no surprise that Iyad Allawi, the handpicked prime minister of the new Iraqi interim government, says he wants the American troops to remain in Iraq. Described in major U.S. newspapers as close to the CIA, Allawi apparently has learned his lessons well.
Meanwhile, the cruel treatment of the Iraqi prisoners has brought shock and shame for America around the world.
The Wall Street Journal and other major newspapers report that Bush administration lawyers, in classified memos in 2002 and 2003, contended that the president is not bound by laws prohibiting torture of prisoners. The report also said the lawyers concluded that any government agents who tortured prisoners at the president's request wouldn't be subject to prosecution.
Still, the White House insists it has abided by the Geneva conventions on treatment of prisoners of war.
On Memorial Day weekend, Bush dedicated the new World War II monument in the presence of thousands of veterans and their families. It was a long overdue tribute to them.
Last Sunday, the president stood overlooking Omaha Beach on the coast of Normandy where allied forces began the invasion of German-occupied Europe. In the backdrop were the white headstones of 9,387 American soldiers who died on that historic day, June 6, 1944.
In his remarks, the president spoke of those who climbed the cliffs under fire and survived that epic struggle 60 years ago, and those who did not, as "the greatest generation of Americans."
Bush did not mention the war in Iraq except to note that the allies from that great endeavor still need to support each other. Standing with French President Jacques Chirac, arch foe of the Iraqi war, Bush said the United States and France were "inseparable allies."
In recent weeks, Bush had tried to portray the war in Iraq as analogous to World War II. Chirac rejected any comparison. At a joint news conference in Paris Saturday with Bush, Chirac said bluntly: "History does not repeat itself."
So far, neither the president nor any of his hawkish advisers has explained why he led the nation down the war path and why all the reasons put forth for the sacrifice have not panned out.
No one has assumed the blame or the responsibility. Is it because no explanation is plausible and none acceptable?
Copyright 2004 Hearst Newspapers.