The battle for hearts and minds was largely successful during the campaign in Malaysia. But can this policy be applied with equal success to any region or area of conflict? Our leaders seem to think so but I have my doubts. Helping people to improve their lives and country is a noble ambition and Im sure does generate some good will, but how much, depends on the particular circumstances of any given conflict. For example, could we have won the hearts and minds of the German people in the 1930's and convinced them not to give their support to the Nazis? Or were we better off spending that money on rearming. And in todays conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan how do we measure success? How much are we prepared to spend? and should this be the job of the military, especially when resources are diverted from essential equipment and maintaing an effective fighting capability? Tony McNulty, the Home Office Minister is the latest politician to use this phrase. In a speech at the Labour Party Conference he used it when talking about the "War on Terror", saying that we need to concentrate on winning the hearts and minds of British muslims. Statements like that lead me to believe that "winning the hearts and minds", has now become a euphemism for appeasement.