Was World War II the Good War?

The American Conservative's issue features a debate about World War II asking the question: was World War II really the Good war? Over the past few decades this question seems to have been at the center of debate among conservatives. The debate has been reignited in recent weeks due to the publication Pat Buchanan's anti-Churchill screed. The Some of the questions asked of the contributors were: "Do the war’s canonical lessons, such as Munich, retain their instructive power, or does the war offer other lessons of greater relevance? Does Churchill provide a model of statesmanship useful for American presidents? What about the largely forgotten Pacific War? Are there other wars, for example, the Great War of 1914-18 in which Churchill also figured prominently, that might offer more when it comes to illuminating the present?"

As a student of history I don't think we should be concerning ourselves with arguing about any historical event in terms of whether it was good or not. (Though I have strayed from this personal rule from time to time and have cast moral judgements on the past.) As someone who is interested in military/diplomatic history I am looking forward to reading what an historian like Andrew J. Bacevich has to say about the war's legacies. The debate may also leave readers with certain insights as to how particular groups remember the past. I am looking forward to reading the featured articles and will post much more on this topic as I finish reading the entire debate.

Part II.

Part III.