The United Nations offers international legitimacy in what we might do. - Anthony Zinni

We promised the Iraqi people freedom, democracy, security and a new and far better life.

How the hell did we get here?" is the question we are left with when the smoke clears. And, inevitably, the answers we get from the men and women who lead us into these commitments are laced with excuses. "We can never know how things will turn out," they tell us with a bewildered shrug. "It's the nature of war to be unpredictable." Or they say, "The burden of all our responsibilities and the crisis response timing made clear planning and actions impossible." Or, "Every war is different." These are copouts.

When I joined the United States Marine Corps as an eighteen-year-old in 1961, I would have told you that wars are always decided entirely on the battlefield. That's where the generals win or lose. I retired in 2000 after four decades of service and multiple experiences in wars and military interventions. By then I had come to realize that there is more to it than that. Political decisions, intelligence estimates, strategies (or their absence), and many other non-battlefield components influenced outcomes to a far greater degree than that eighteen-year-old new Marine could have ever imagined. These off the battlefield components have become increasingly significant as each new intervention is attempted in today's complex world.