Mark Levin: "There was no debate after we were attacked on Pearl Harbor about how many enemy casualties there would be ... I'm sick and tired of this proportionality, legal or not. I'm sick and tired of it. Victory, the word victory is never used."

Mark Levin: "There was no debate after we were attacked on Pearl Harbor about how many enemy casualties there would be ... I'm sick and tired of this proportionality, legal or not. I'm sick and tired of it. Victory, the word victory is never used."

From the October 10, 2023, edition of Westwood One's The Mark Levin Show

MARK LEVIN (HOST): There was no debate after we were attacked on Pearl Harbor about how many enemy casualties there would be. No debate whatsoever. How many enemy casualties would there be in Japan? How many enemy casualties will there be in Germany? How many men enemy casualties will there be in Italy? We call it the greatest generation because it is and was. Since then, we don't appear to know how to fight wars.

You know, when Nixon did the Christmas bombing at Hanoi and Hanoi Harbor for 10 days, B-52s, relentless 24/7 -- the North Vietnamese and the Viet Cong militia wouldn't come to the table to negotiate. After 10 days, they begged to come to the table. What that demonstrated was we could have won in Vietnam, but we didn't. Not because of the brave men who fought, we lost 58,000 of them, but because the way we fought, Doesn't matter how many soldiers you pour into a fight, a battle -- when you have the capacity to destroy their capital, the capacity to destroy everything, and you choose not to.

It was really the -- I'd say Korea and then Vietnam were really the first wars -- they're not fought to win. My opinion. And most of the wars we have fought since, not all, but most have had the same mindset. Afghanistan. We send our yanks into the valleys, into the mountains. You look at Joey Jones, what a remarkable human being, on Fox. Lost both of his legs, IEDs. How many of our men were fighting over there were killed going door-to-door? Why do we develop technology -- and I'm not even talking about nuclear technology, even conventional technology that has the capacity to do damage for miles at a time, and not use it?

Is it righteous to lose a war? Is it righteous to substitute an American for a terrorist? I'm sick and tired of this proportionality, legal or not. I'm sick and tired of it. Victory, the word victory is never used. It wasn't used by Biden today. Biden clearly is not doing everything he can. And I'm not talking about introducing troops, obviously, but he clearly can't -- isn't doing everything he can. He armed this enemy with tens of billionsof dollars, knowing damn well -- we just had a judge rule in the American First legal case, which I'm proud to say my wife worked on with other great lawyers at that organization, just tonight. Basically, ruled the Taylor Force Act was violated because some of those funds went to terrorism. Does it get any more damnable than that? I'll bet you the -- I'm the only one talking about it. I'll bet you it won't be on a single cable show unless I bring it up, and then it'll be on every cable show.

But, anyway, you can't win a war when you're exchanging your own troops for whatever the enemy decides. We know this enemy wants civilians killed. They're Nazis. They're terrorists. This is what they've done in every one of these battles, but this battle's different. This wasn't a battle, you know, to push back the Israelis, or this side -- this was a battle to destroy an entire country and wipe out an entire people. And you see what they would do if they could.