Bill Benson of Gorham is a retired colonel in the United States Army.

As a 24-year Army veteran, I’ve seen firsthand both the cost of war and the importance of American leadership. Today, as global tensions rise, the national conversation about when and how the United States should use military force has grown louder and more polarized. Some argue for swift intervention. Others urge unmitigated restraint.

From where I sit, both approaches seem perilous.

War is not an abstract policy choice. It is carried out by real people, mostly young Americans who are asked to risk their lives in the pursuit of national objectives. That decision should never be driven by impulse or politics. It demands disciplined judgment.

Disengaging from the world is not a viable option. When the United States steps back, instability does not fade away. It tends to spread. There is a better path forward, and it is not new.

In the 1980s, Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger outlined a framework for when military force should be used. Gen. Colin Powell later expanded those ideas into what became known as the Powell Doctrine. This framework was developed after hard reflection on the lessons learned from the conflict in Vietnam and the desire not to repeat the same mistakes. It offers a disciplined way to apply judgment to decisions that carry the highest stakes.

These principles ask leaders to be clear about what is truly at risk, to exhaust non-military
options before turning to force, and to define achievable objectives tied to a broader political goal. They emphasize that if the United States commits to a conflict, it should do so decisively, with the resources needed to succeed.

Just as important, these principles demand an honest accounting of costs and consequences, not just at the outset but through to the post-conflict environment. They call for support from both the American public and our allies, recognizing that legitimacy matters. And they insist on something that has too often been missing: a clear and realistic plan for how the conflict will end.

These are not academic concerns. In Iraq and Afghanistan, we drifted away from this kind of disciplined framework. Objectives evolved, timelines stretched and missions expanded beyond their original scope. What began as defined operations became years, then decades, of involvement without a clear end state.

The result was not just a financial or political cost, but a human one. Veterans and their families continue to carry that burden, and that experience should guide us now.

These principles do not argue for isolationism. They argue for clarity and accountability. They strengthen American leadership by ensuring that when we act, we do so with purpose and with a real chance of success.

We need our political leaders to apply these standards to today’s conflict with Iran. They must recognize that a disciplined approach is not weakness, it is good judgment. It is a recognition that alliances matter, that end states matter, that long-term consequences matter, and ultimately, that our young soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines matter.

The senior senator from Maine, Sen. Collins, recently stated that she would not support “troops on the ground” without the president making his case to Congress. Her leadership is needed now and in the future. The Maine congressional delegation should speak with one voice to urge a return to the tenets espoused in the Powell Doctrine. A set of guidelines born from another conflict that lacked political consensus, clear objectives and a defined end state.

The United States will face moments when military force is necessary. But if we are going to risk American lives, as well as the country’s fiscal strength and political reputation, we must expect more than fear-baiting and grandstanding. We must demand a thoughtful strategy and a defined set of conditions indicating when are objectives are met and when our service members may start to come home.

During this fragile ceasefire and before any potential resumption of hostilities, it is time those conditions are clearly communicated to the American people.