A Southern Reader Says That America’s Less Diverse, Less PC Military Used To Actually WIN Wars
Print Friendly and PDF

From: Kit Brewer (e-mail him)

Just a casual look at the USA's won/lost record in military conflicts ought to be enough to convince any doubters that diversity is weakness not strength. When the military was all white, and all male, we won the Revolutionary War, War of 1812, Mexican War, Spanish/American War, WW1 and WW2. I don't include the Civil War because it was a bunch of American white guys fighting each other.

Any way, we were 6-0 with an all-white military.


With a more diverse army in Korea, the best we could manage was a draw. Lost Vietnam with a still more diverse military. We managed a victory against pathetic opposition in the First Gulf War. We've lost in Iraq and Afghanistan against poorly-armed opposition.

The way I read it, we're 1-3-1 since embracing diversity. We've gone from defeating better-armed, higher-quality opposition, to losing to poorly-armed pathetic opposition.

See previous letters by Kit Brewer.

James Fulford writes: I just want to acknowledge, briefly, that many of those wars featured black troops, in segregated units. For example, there were about 4 million Americans in uniform in WW1, and 370, 000 of those were black.And there's a lot of room for quibbling about which wars were won, which lost, and which thrown by the civillian leadership.

That being said, Mr. Brewer has a valid point—the US Armed Forces used to worry more about winning wars than about how diverse the troops were, and how they felt about things.

Print Friendly and PDF