I have always believed that you have to put things in perspective of the time. The real question to me has always been given that point in time, if you were presented with the same facts, would you make the same choice? If the answer is yes, then you can not fault the judgement. If the answer is no, then you can. It is unfair to question a decision made with one set of facts wby judging it with a different set of facts.
A case in point as an example. Going from memory here. Zumwalt was once asked, "If he had to do it all over again, would he order the use of agent orange?" Understand this is after knowing that his son died from the effects of Agent Orange and his grandson was born with issues due to the effects of Agent Orange upon his son. His answer was quick in return, "Yes." A long pause and the reporter started to say something as a follow up and Zumwalt interrupted him. He said that he made the best decision he could given the information he had. If he was presented with the same information in the same situation without any further knowledge he would do it again.
Two things should strike home about that. First, Judging a decision based upon different information is not necessarily fair to the decision maker. The second is, that even after suffering tremendous personal tragedy based upon his, and his alone, decision, he was unwavering in the belief that he made the right decision.
I doubt that anyone in the administration at the time who supported the decision at the time would feel otherwise nor could they be swayed to believe otherwise.
