RSS
Home
Defining "victory"
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
There was a time when it was clear when "victory" could be achieved in a war. During the Civil War in America, victory for the North came when the South was defeated and unsuccessful in its attempt to secede from the union. In World War II, it was obvious that the Nazis had to be defeated and Europe freed, and the Japanese subdued in the Pacific theatre.
Things got a bit iffy when the Vietnam War came about. The US lost nearly 60,000 lives there, and for what? Would victory have been defined as crushing the North Vietnamese and taking over their upper end of the country, replacing it with an American style democracy?
Now come Iraq and Afghanistan. Many years of "war" with no end in sight. In recent interviews, GOP front-runner Sarah Palin has been saying we need to give the generals in charge of the war in Afghanistan "all the troops they're asking for" so we can "win the war" and exit with "victory."
So ... how do we define "victory" in Afghanistan? We invaded the country after 9/11 because it was fairly obvious that the planners of that horrible day's events were hiding there. We caught some of them, most notably Khalid Shiekh Mohammed and others, but never got to the kingpin Osama Bin Laden. The whole process brought about the crumbling of the Taliban's grip on power there, which is a good thing.
But now what? With Palin and other neocons braying about escalating the war and troop presence until we achieve "victory" the question must be asked: What is victory? The easy answer might be to capture Bin Laden and convert the country to some sort of American version of democracy. However, it must be obvious to everyone that if we were going to catch this guy, we would've achieved that goal by now. And trying to change a third world country into a carbon copy of the USA is unrealistic and unachievable. As U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson noted recently, "We're trying to change a 14th century civilization with 19th century strategies."
In the 21st century, we need to realize that invading countries with hundreds of thousands of "boots on the ground" isn't wise or realistic. And finally, Sarah Palin and others who are calling for "victory" in Afghanistan and Iraq, please answer the one basic question: How do you define "victory" and how was it worth thousands of American lives to achieve?
Related Articles:
Comments
