It appears that some people think it would be nice if we were to keep war impersonal. Each to his own opinion, of course, but this does not seem to be a good line of thought. In the first place it is impossible. People get killed in war, and while it is certainly true that in today's wars death is not frequently caused by the individual act of an individual soldier, to shy away from this concept is to diminish the soldier's motivation to do his duty. It has been so long now since we have had a full sized war that a large part of the population cannot remember the essential wartime propaganda which was fed to us. It is my own belief that hatred is necessary to the successful conduct of war. This may be unpleasant to contemplate, but I do not think it can be successfully denied. When a man is required by his duty to put his life on the line, politics is usually the last thing on his mind. I remember how I felt, and I feel that my emotions were more the rule than the exception. The Nips hit us without warning when we were sleeping in on Sunday morning, and our response, for the most part, was completely savage. I think this has always been so. In a recent bit of dialog I dug up concerning Stonewall Jackson, he had just completed the evening survey of a battlefield on which thousands of men on both sides lay dead and dying. Jackson was a very reserved man, not given to outbursts, but as he returned to his tent he exclaimed: "How horrible war is!" His aide responded. "It certainly is, General, but what can we do? They have invaded our land." Jackson's response was a shout. "Kill them! Kill them all! Every last man!" War has got to be personalized. If you forget that, you will lose.