Respecting Your Enemies
We are a long way from this kind of strategic focus and yet it will be the key to an acceptable future.
I have listened to many smart, well-educated people pontificate on the so-called practical options available to Hamas and the Iranian religious dictatorship.
The other day, I was startled to read that despite Israel’s overwhelming military power, Hamas still controlled one-third of Gaza. Furthermore, one of Hamas’s leaders said none of the terrorist organization’s goals had changed or were negotiable. When you remember that Hamas’s founding document pledges that not a single Jew will remain, the concept of a truce evaporates.
It hit me that a central problem of Western strategic planning is the refusal to respect our opponents.
We consistently translate whatever our opponents say into something we can somehow work with and find a mutually acceptable compromise.
Ask yourself these two questions:
First, if the Iranian religious dictatorship and its adherents have said consistently for 47 years “death to America,” is it possible they mean it?
Second, if Hamas has said consistently since its founding “not a single Jew will remain,” is it possible that the group’s goal is to kill or expel every Jew — man, woman, and child — in the contested area, which includes all of Israel?
This problem of truly listening to and understanding your opponent is a major premise of Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War.” He asserted that if you know your enemy, you have won half the battle.
David Halberstam’s remarkable 1972 book, “The Best and the Brightest” drives home the reality that the John F. Kennedy-Lindon B. Johnson team of brilliant, superbly educated people simply could not grasp how deeply determined Ho Chi Minh and his followers were to win in Vietnam — despite immense death, destruction, and suffering.
The French reporter and analyst Bernard Fall made it clear that Ho had actually read a biography of George Washington in the 1930s. Ho concluded that a long War of attrition and endurance would work first against the French and then the Americans.
Anyone who studied Ho’s life (and Fall’s extraordinary coverage of the French defeat) would have cautioned that only total war threatening to crush the North had any hope of winning.
My dad served 26 years in the infantry, including during World War II, Korea, and Vietnam. He thought highly of Jean Lartéguy’s two classic novels “The Centurions” and “the Praetorians.” Lartéguy captured brilliantly the French failures in Vietnam and Algeria. Essentially, he argued that the West had no doctrine capable of defeating the combined nationalist-communist synthesis that was winning in the third world.
My dad thought Lartéguy had a profound insight into the values and commitment that our Western elites seemed incapable of understanding or defeating.
As President Donald J. Trump likes to say, we have the finest most effective tactical military in history. The recent real-time improvisation to rescue two airmen in Iran was an extraordinary achievement.
Unfortunately, tactical brilliance by itself does not win wars.
Strategic planning would begin with the end state we want to achieve. “The Art of War” emphasized that the goal is to win — not to fight. Sun wrote that the greatest generals win bloodless victories by out-thinking their opponents, not by outfighting them.
In “On War,” Carl von Clausewitz drove home that war is an extension of politics and must be designed to achieve an acceptable outcome.
If, as I suspect will happen, neither Hamas nor the Iranian dictatorship agree to terms that we can accept, we need a war-winning strategy for each — not an application of military violence as an end in itself.
We are a long way from this kind of strategic focus and yet it will be the key to an acceptable future.
It starts by respecting your opponents.
You can manage your subscription preferences to choose the updates, newsletters, and alerts you want to receive on the website.
We have a tremendous opportunity here to aid the Iranian people in their struggle for freedom. The intransigence of the negotiators, who continue to believe they’re in charge -without army, navy, or military, must be used to equip the people with the tools to overthrow their oppressors, who surely fear the people more than they fear us. After all, the people know where their oppressors live, and if given the right equipment, I’m sure they’re up for payback. Let the people return themselves to power, not us.
GREAT! You nailed it. My latest to @realdonaldtrump - POPE FRANCIS vs. POPE LEO XIV vs. President TRUMP: Mercy, Peace, and God's WAR
Pope Francis passed away in April 2025. His successor, Pope Leo XIV (the first American pope), has continued elements of Francis’s welcoming tone — such as blessings for individuals — while affirming that core Church doctrine remains unchanged. The focus stays on shifting attitudes toward greater welcome without altering teaching.
Yes, you’re recalling one of Pope Francis’s most famous lines. In July 2013, aboard the papal plane returning from World Youth Day in Brazil, a reporter asked about rumors of a “gay lobby” in the Vatican. Francis replied:
“If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?”
This pastoral, humble statement lowered the judgmental temperature on a divisive social issue. It emphasized mercy and accompaniment for individuals seeking God, while distinguishing orientation from acts (still contrary to Church teaching). In effect: “I won’t judge you personally.”
Pope Leo XIV’s contrasting voice came in his first Easter Urbi et Orbi message on April 5, 2026, delivered from the central loggia of St. Peter’s Basilica amid the U.S.-Israel-Iran conflict. In a bold, prophetic tone, he declared:
“Let those who have weapons lay them down! Let those who have the power to unleash wars choose peace! Not a peace imposed by force, but through dialogue!”
He urged abandoning desires for conflict, domination, and the “delusion of omnipotence,” rooting the call in the Beatitudes and Jesus as Prince of Peace.
Side-by-Side Comparison
Francis (2013): Informal in-flight press conference. Pastoral mercy toward individuals. Softened perceptions on a personal issue.
Leo XIV (Easter 2026): Solemn, high-visibility Easter address to the world. Prophetic justice against war and power. Confronted worldly leaders directly.
Key Difference in Leadership Style
Francis’s line was inward-focused mercy: how the Church treats people. Leo’s is outward-focused: what the Church must publicly oppose. One invites personal accompaniment; the other demands public witness for peace — even when it creates tension with political powers.
President Trump responded sharply to Leo’s message, criticizing the pope as “weak on crime” and “terrible for foreign policy,” seeing it as political interference. Leo replied he has “no fear” and will continue speaking out for the Gospel of peace.
Note on the Settings
These are not equal platforms. Francis offered a casual remark in a press scrum. Leo delivered a formal Easter blessing watched worldwide. The weight and visibility differ significantly.
God's WAR: A Biblical Contrast
In the Book of Exodus, God Himself wages decisive action against Pharaoh to free His chosen people from slavery. Pharaoh repeatedly refuses Moses’s command: “Let my people go.” God responds with escalating plagues — blood, hail mixed with fire, locusts, darkness, and the death of the firstborn — followed by the destruction of Pharaoh’s army at the Red Sea.
The Bible presents this as God’s WAR: supernatural, targeted judgment on Egypt and its gods (Exodus 12:12). No Israelite army fights initially; it is divine intervention enforcing liberation. The plagues function like “drones of that period” — remote, overwhelming strikes disrupting economy, command, and heirs without conventional ground invasion.
From the scriptural viewpoint, this was fully justified: ending brutal oppression, upholding the covenant, and revealing God’s glory. It succeeded where dialogue alone failed. Pharaoh’s hardened heart met consequences — and the people were freed.
This stands in sharp contrast to modern calls that frame all war as inherently unblessable. Trump’s firm ultimatum style (“change course or face consequences”) produced a fragile two-week ceasefire in the Iran conflict, with measurable restraint so far. Strength with clear red lines compelled dialogue faster than prolonged appeals alone might have.
Where We Stand
I side with Trump’s approach here. His declaration — “Be gone! Change! Or face the consequences” — worked, at least temporarily. Pope Leo’s prophetic witness for peace is rooted in the Gospel and deserves respect, but history (including Chamberlain’s appeasement) reminds us that firmness sometimes prevents greater evil. Only outcomes and God’s full knowledge will judge which path best served justice and reduced suffering.
We can pray for wisdom for President Trump, protection for civilians, conversion of hearts away from hatred, and genuine security — not just temporary quiet.
Food for Thought (William J. Federer):
“The COUNTRY is controlled by LAWS. LAWS by POLITICIANS. POLITICIANS by VOTERS. VOTERS by PUBLIC OPINION. PUBLIC OPINION by the MEDIA & EDUCATION, so whoever controls MEDIA & EDUCATION, controls the COUNTRY.”
What do you think, Carmen? This version keeps the punch while making it more concise and readable. Want any tweaks to the tone, length, or emphasis on “God’s WAR”?
Link to your site: https://bestsolutionsfl.wordpress.com
Let’s keep refining!
50 web pages -Explore just-war theory -Augustine on war ethics
Emphasize Trump's ultimatum impact?
"Let’s keep refining!" NO WAY! This is absolutely FANTASTIC! I must post now. Quadrillion THANKS.
You're very welcome, Carmen B @justaluckyfool!
I'm thrilled the refined version hit the mark perfectly — concise, punchy, and with "God's WAR" woven in as the strong biblical contrast you wanted.
Go ahead and post it now. It’s ready to go live on R.E.A.D.: Read, Examine, Analyze, Decide.
https://bestsolutionsfl.wordpress.com
R.E.A.D.: Read, Examine, Analyze, Decide
A site sharing thought-provoking quotes and articles, encouraging visitors to read, examine, analyze, and decide...
If you ever want a quick tweak, title suggestion, or help with the next one, just holler. You've got this!
Quadrillion thanks right back — keep shining that light. God bless, and let’s pray for wisdom, peace with justice, and clear eyes in these turbulent times.
Back at ya anytime! 🚀