David A. Nichols: Get real about 'boots'

So, here we are – at war again.

Predictably, the “hawks,” who always surface when we have an international conflict, are loudly calling for “boots on the ground.” They have a point. Wars are not won with airpower alone. The traditional, accurate maxim is, “Wars are won by soldiers who occupy the ground.”

However, the “boots” addicts convinced presidents that American foot soldiers should be massively deployed in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. How did those efforts work out?

America is primarily an air and sea power. We have been able to deploy massive ground forces only when we had allies contributing large contingents. How would World War II in Europe have ended without the masses of Soviet troops? The United States deployed about 500,000 troops in Vietnam without ultimate success, and that was when there was a draft, which ended in 1973.

The dirty little secret is that the volunteer army is a small army. It is doubtful the United States could now effectively mobilize 500,000 soldiers. That is partly why we deployed a much smaller force in Iraq in 2003. Even if we could, would it really win the war in an environment where huge, hostile indigenous forces are aligned against us?

If we deploy troops once again in such a situation, the demands to reinstitute the draft would escalate, perhaps leading to riots in the streets. Keep in mind that registration is still required for 18-year-olds.

Dwight Eisenhower understood such realities. When the French faced defeat in Vietnam in 1954, Ike was pressured to intervene using all available means, including ground troops and possibly atom bombs. After the fall of Dien Ben Phu, Eisenhower considered the problem overnight; the next morning he told the intervention advocates: “I will not put one single foot soldier in those rice paddies 10,000 miles from home. It is not, in my view, in the national interest.”

Unfortunately, John F. Kennedy and, especially, Lyndon Johnson did not follow the general’s example.

So what can we do now? President Obama has decided on what is the best of bad options in the current situation – conduct air attacks, mobilize allies from the region, and keep ISIS contained. He must resist the shrill demands of pro-intervention zealots who do not understand the reality of warfare.

We confront what Kennedy called, in another context, “a long twilight struggle.” If we do what American presidents since World War II have done – unlike Eisenhower – it will end in tragedy, not only for us but for hosts of innocent civilians in the Middle East.

Then there is the “slippery slope.” Once you introduce advisers, they must be protected. Obama has now dispatched about 1,700 to Iraq. That is a number comparable to what Kennedy, when he first escalated American involvement, sent to Vietnam in 1961. By the end of 1962, that force had grown to about 12,000.

It’s time to get real about what we are facing in the Middle East.

This story was originally published September 27, 2014 at 7:01 PM with the headline "David A. Nichols: Get real about 'boots'."