I am puzzled by the liberal Democrats’ endless hectoring of President Bush to publicly detail a “plan” for the war in Iraq. Is it not already self-evident that the only reasonable “plan” is to win? What else is there to plan unless we are preparing to surrender?

Or perhaps these Democrats are insisting on precise details of every upcoming military operation? Is that the “plan” they want everyone to know about? It shouldn’t be, lest we be tipping our hand to the enemy. Of course they just want to be told that the war is over (as do we all), but unfortunately war is war.

With that in mind let me ask: After Pearl Harbor what was President Franklin Roosevelt’s “plan” for World War II? If he had announced in 1941 that he “planned” for the war to last until 1945, and that 300,000 to 400,000 Americans would lose their lives and that it would conclude with atomic bombs over Japan and the Communist enslavement of Eastern Europe, I wonder how many of today’s liberal Democrats would have voted to support that ambiguous “plan”?

Or worse yet, what if they voted against it and we lost?

Jeffrey K. Jacob

Corinna