Victory? Please define

[GePap]

So, this is for all the people who support the war in Iraq.

Can any of you define victory, and how you would be able to show that victory was achieved.

Cause I think all of us who question this war are still waiting to know what exactly you think will be achieved.

[BlackCat]

What about a Iraq with democratic government ?

If they have to do a civil war to settle a such, well, so be it - other countries has been through the same process. In the iraqui case, the process has actually been hurried due to the destroying of Saddams regime.

Other countries must just wait and suffer because the international community doesn't dare/has sufficient interests to move.

[Dauphin]

I don't see how you can define victory. You can maybe define some of its qualities, but it is a nebulous concept in the current context.

[BlackCat]

Well, I guess that GePap is a survivalist that prefers to live silently - maybe occationally squealing on a neighbour to show a good faith instead of resistance. That is what you do in a strong dictatorship as Iraq was as long as there wasn't other forces doing something.

[Hueij]

I seem to remember Bush making a public statement about how the war was won so what is is thread about???

[BlackCat]

Well, somehow I think that GePap doesn't agree with Bush's policy, so he may have some doubts about that statement.

[Mercator]

Originally posted by BlackCat
What about a Iraq with democratic government ?

Looks like we're done then. They already have one.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Mercator


Looks like we're done then. They already have one.

Yeah, you are right, though it could be desirable that it got a bit more control over the situation

[Master Zen]

- A democratic government which can boast of long-term political stability and the inclusion of all major ethnic factions in the political process.

- An end to violence caused by terrorists, insurgents, and the Coalition.

the last point is often overlooked:

- Economic stability, recovery of infrastructure loss and the ability of the country to finance its own long-term growth.


As you can see, "victory" in Iraq will not be a military one, it will be much more complex than that. As it stands, and contrary to the "good news" that the right wingers like to make everybody think, militarily it is far from being won. Just the casualty statistics speak for themselves: the Insurgency has a virtual 1:1 kill ratio with the Coalition (including Iraqi military and police forces) and monthly civilian casualties are nothing to gloat about.

And the latest frictions with the Sunni bloc are of course, not exactly the best news one could hope for regarding political unity.

[BlackCat]

You are quite rigth MZ - the right wing is a bunch of wimpies that doesn't have the gut to use the nessecary brutal force to get control such as leftwingers several times has proven they have

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Hueij
I seem to remember Bush making a public statement about how the war was won so what is is thread about???

"Victory is not no violence" ... George W. Bush

[Blaupanzer]

Victory was to find and disable WMD, peacefully replace a brutal dictator, and return public funding to the infrastructure instead of to military expansion and palaces. At least they don't fund palaces anymore. Now victory would be a return to the relative safety most Iraqi citizens had under the brutal dictator. Whoops!

[BeBMan]

Victory is when your enemies are laying in the dust in front of you, begging for mercy, kissing your feet.

[East Street Trader]

Perhaps the question is victory for whom?

For President Bush I guess it would be something which allowed him to think that his decisions have been sensible ones.

Something to do with the incidence of international terrorism directed against the US, perhaps. Rather difficult to imagine exactly what.

For the US generally I would have thought that getting your troops out might be enough. Although if Iraq then fragments, is invaded by Iran or descends into chaos for an extended period I don't know if simply getting your troops out will be enough to count as a victory.

For Iraq I should think that victory consists in someone appearing who is brutal enough or charismatic enough to bring stability about. I doubt it altogether matters whether the resultant regime is more or less repressive than Saddam Hussein's.

For Sunni chieftains it would be a Sunni dominated state, for Shi'a chieftains a Shi'a dominated state and for Kurds perhaps a Kurdish state.

For some of Iraq's neighbours (Kuwait and Iran, for example) a kind of victory has already been won in that it will be a long time before they are again threatened by Iraq. Perhaps further victory for them might be Iraq fragmenting. I don't know if they would have territorial ambitions.

[Patroklos]

To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of the women.