Fred Hiatt and Robert McNamara

What would the Washington Post editorial page do with the death of Robert McNamara? I braced myself before I read. Sure enough, McNamara turned out not too bad.

McNamara was "vilified" by the anti-war folks. But in the end McNamara was just a "tragic character." You see:

Vietnam was called "McNamara's War" by one of his Senate critics, and to some degree the term stuck. But in truth, no appointed official makes a war on his own, or with the intellectual brilliance of his analysis. Any president, once forces are involved in a conflict, is under intense political pressure not to "lose" the war, as are members of Congress.

Right, so... It's not all McNamara's fault. True. But that's not the point. I mean, you could point to any individual Nazi high officer, and say it wasn't all their fault, and that doesn't really matter in terms of deciding whether their legacy is a positive or negative one.

The point is that McNamara played a roll in leading to the killing of hundreds of thousands of civilians. It's an interesting question as to how significant his role was, but regardless of the answer, it doesn't change that he was terrible, right?