Where's moral clarity?

With the Indiana Pacers no longer in the hunt for an NBA title and the summer television season now in full swing, there was no escape from last weekend's media onslaught. \nBreathless anchors praised the courage of the veterans of D-Day and extolled the optimistic oration of the late President Ronald Reagan. The networks often seemed unsure of how to balance these two titanic events, jumping from World War II to the Cold War with transitions smooth enough to give viewers whiplash. All the while there was a common theme linking D-Day to the Reagan's presidency, an ideal that is missing from our current struggle in Iraq.\nThe Allied invasion of France and Reagan's policy toward the Soviet Union shared a moral clarity that united America and helped this country achieve its noble objectives. America's campaign against its current nemesis -- terrorism -- has lost that moral clarity, and as a result, the image of America has suffered greatly.\nPresident Reagan had great success in portraying the Soviet Union in a negative light. Reagan referred to the U.S.S.R. as an "Evil Empire" and implored it to loosen its grasp on Eastern Europe, constantly invoking the image of liberty in his speeches. The moral clarity of Reagan's images and words was something that the world, including the declining Soviet empire, could not ignore. \nIn much the same manner, the United States had moral clarity in its war against fascism. Despite the firebombing of Dresden and the atomic attacks on Japan, few people mourn the triumph of the Allied forces. The evil of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan was so great that victory would be accepted at any cost. The invasion of D-Day is viewed today as a great triumph for freedom. And the presence of the German chancellor at the anniversary ceremonies is evidence that history has judged the Allies to have been on the side of justice.\nIn the aftermath of Sept. 11, the United States had worldwide support for its military campaign in Afghanistan. President Bush experienced record-high approval ratings in part because of his ability to break down the problem into its simplest form: The terrorists were evil and they had to be crushed. It was a simple point, one hard to contest. \nAs American forces continued their justified pursuit of al Qaeda, the Bush administration began its saber-rattling with Iraq. Saddam Hussein's evil was not questioned, but the legitimacy of the war was hotly contested by the same allies that sent troops to Afghanistan. There had been no Iraqi assault on America, and Bush's attempts to associate Iraq with al Qaeda evoked skepticism.\nAmerica ignored many allies and entered the war without convincing the world of the moral clarity of its cause. The United States sacrificed its moral authority it earned to wage war on al Qaeda for the contentious business of nation-building and occupation in Iraq. \nAmerica's questionable war with Iraq has angered many allies and caused the world to view us with suspicion and resentment. Sadly, we may have lost the moral authority needed to punish terrorists with military force. This moral clarity is absent from our occupation in Iraq, which is a significant reason why Americans waxed sentimental as they watched the news this weekend.\nBetween D-Day and Reagan, I hope you enjoyed the trip down memory lane. In a few days, the headlines will again be focused on Iraq -- in all of its moral murkiness.