From the "Civil War" to "The War" and all in between, no matter how much I resist and try to make excuses (oh my gosh a whole week of this that's too much of a commmitment!), the work of Ken Burns (and let's not forget his also-talented brother Ric) has seduced, hooked and fascinated me. Once I start watching his films, can't help it, I'm in for the long haul. Whatever his perceived weaknesses as an objective historian, there's not doubt that he's a master storyteller.

Please, Ken, stick around long enough to help us make sense of Vietnam and Iraq, in your inimitable manner. My couch is ready.

The most important thing that "The War" does is hold a mirror to ourselves - Americans, to compare our lives then - and now. It shows us just how Americans CAN come together to fight a war that is, in fact, necessary or "just". To me, the program shows us just how faithful Americans can be when our way of life is really attacked and threatened. Today, we are pulled in at least two directions by our political leaders in the "War on Terror" which has been (wrongly) compared with the second world war in importance. Present political leaders want us to support the war on terror but ask nothing from us. Nothing. We are supposed to go on living just as we have been, so that the claims of pending doom, when seen through the filter of experience like that of America during World War II, ring extraordinarily hollow. If the 'War on Terror' was such an imminent threat, do you think that the country as a whole might have to mobilize against this common enemy as did our "greatest generation"? Or are this generation's leaders missing something?

I am enjoying Ken Burns' "The War." I know there has been a series of controversies surrounding this project (Hispanic soldiers felt left out, not enough credit to the Soviets, etc.), but Burns said from the outset that this would not be a comprehensive history but a personal one, letting the vets speak for themselves without the usual talking heads' analysis.

Many of these guys haven't told anyone their stories including their families. Some families learn of their father's bravery in his youth when they find his medals after his funeral. Burns is trying to bring all the grandpas out into the open for one last hurrah.

To offer a context, we are as far now from the end of the Second World War as we were from the Civil War in 1927.

I am learning a few things despite years of reading about the war. I wasn't aware just how costly the early air war in Europe had been. The gunner describing how he tossed the frozen gobs of his blood out of his shattered ball turret so he wouldn't have to clean it later was wrenching. All I could do was admire what tough sons of bitches these guys were. It is good to hear these voices from the edges of living memory before they pass on.

The lessons learned from the war were good and bad. Bad because we developed the idea we could do anything we wanted whether it was right or not. Nothing since the war has or will ever match its intensity or necessity for sacrifice. Good because we learned we could work together for a relatively long period of time for the common good. In my experience, only the race to put a man on the moon has a similar feel.

Burns' style can approach treacle if he's not careful but he does make you feel what the witness felt - the pain, the loneliness, the fear. If only we were all made to sacrifice now the way they did then for the Iraqi war instead of just our men and women in uniform and their families.

I noticed the criticism of Shelby Foote in the "Civil War" by some writers. Foote's 3-volume narrative of the Civil War was commissioned in part in response to Bruce Catton's many volumes which had a Union-centric tone. I wish Burns had found an able counterpart to Foote's "noble Cause" musings. I once saw a bumper sticker on a car with Connecticut plates. It showed a Confederate flag with the red circle and slash over it. "You lost. Get over it," it read.

I have always given Abraham Lincoln some credit for winning the First and Second World Wars and the Cold War. If Lincoln had let the "Wayward Sisters" go in peace in the 19th century, there would have been no United States to fight the Kaiser, Hitler or the Soviets in the 20th.

A documentary series about the Soviet Union's contribution to the war would be great, but it doesn't belong in a documentary about America's contribution to the war.

To those saying the Soviets won the war, they wouldn't have without our help, nor would we without theirs. However, a documentary about a nation's experiences during the war needs no more than a cursory mention of this because it isn't what the story is about.

And remember, without the Soviet Union, Hiter wouldn't have had the successed he did early on. The Soviets were happy to share in the partition of Poland and shipped Germany plenty of supplies right up until Germany invaded them. Hell, it is often said they just turned the last convoy of supplies around and used it in the invasion.

And if Russia hadn't made peace with Japan after their early conflict the war would have looked much different. The point is they did make a peace there and had little interest in renewing hostilities until they thought they could profit from it.

There's a lot of high falutin' talk about this and that.

But I'm just a regular joe from Minnesota. A Minnesota where values are different. My Papa fought the war and my great grand daddy fought in the Civil War. Well, not actually fought, but they were in the army doing something.

American values are the bestest values we've got. And I'll be damed if I'm going to sit by while some anti Bush cry babies talk about how we've heard enough about the heroes of World War II, the Greatest War Ever.

We haven't!

Because as long as there's a soldier in Iraq that needs armor. Or a child in a public school that has democrats trying force government health care, I'm going to stand up for the rights of people to watch TV and feel really good about being American, today, yesterday, and tomorrow--and next season.

So the next time you're crying about some 1 million dead Iraqis, remember this. We didn't ask for this war on Terror. It came crashing into us -- on 9/11. That's why we've spent 200 billion on this war, because it's the war of a lifetime. Hell, it took the first hundred billion just to get this thing off the ground. Soon, we'll have armor for the troops and next thing you know it, we'll be gettin' after Al Qaida and even Bin Laden himself. Brooklyn wasn't built in a day! Iraq is a start. A damn good start. Now we're starting to get a feel for this thing.

Someday, you'll finally realize what it means to be an American--it means that you realize 9/11 means we've got to really go apeshit ballsitic until--well, I'm no scientist, like I said I'm a regular joe. But I do know how to support my troops and it sure as shit isn't by bringing them home to their families! And it aint' going to be easy, especially when we're fighting Al Qaeda in places they never thought to go--like Iraq.

Nobody understands the brilliant reverse psychology of President Bush. And like the spider catches the fly, we've got Al Qaeda in Iraq cornered--well, not really cornered, but more like dispersed thinly among civilians and who knows all, but hell, it's a start.

These colors don't run, like the mascara of Katherine Harris. She didn't cry when she lost her senate seat.

Sometimes if you think before you shoot, your target gets away. Why do you think President Bush Let Bin Laden get away at Tora Bora? To crush him, with old age and the vengence of the slow decay of time. Now isn't that a hell of a lot stronger than any...well, like I said, I'm no scientist.

God Bless America. And you, too.