It's like kissing your sister
It's easy to define what winning a war is like. Think the USA in World War II.
It's also easy to define what losing -- really losing -- a war is like. Think Japan or Germany in World War II.
By these definitions, Iraq (and for that matter even Vietnam) were neither wins or losses. If you define "losing" as "not achieving your stated goals before starting the war" then both are probably losses. If you define "losing" as "having the enemy occupy your capital" then the US not only hasn't lost a war in 210 years, but we probably never will. And if you define winning as "unambiguously bending the enemy state and its population to your will" then we probably will never actually win a war again. In fact, these days, nobody ever will.
So we are not winning the Iraq war, and we aren't losing it either.
Maybe it is a tie? As any sports fan can tell you, ties really suck. But it's still better then losing, right?
It's easy to define what winning a war is like. Think the USA in World War II.
It's also easy to define what losing -- really losing -- a war is like. Think Japan or Germany in World War II.
By these definitions, Iraq (and for that matter even Vietnam) were neither wins or losses. If you define "losing" as "not achieving your stated goals before starting the war" then both are probably losses. If you define "losing" as "having the enemy occupy your capital" then the US not only hasn't lost a war in 210 years, but we probably never will. And if you define winning as "unambiguously bending the enemy state and its population to your will" then we probably will never actually win a war again. In fact, these days, nobody ever will.
So we are not winning the Iraq war, and we aren't losing it either.
Maybe it is a tie? As any sports fan can tell you, ties really suck. But it's still better then losing, right?
posted by Mike at
2:38 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home