This is GQ, so I’m not looking for an argument, or any discussion of right or wrong or good or bad, I’m just hoping someone has a factual answer to this: What would it mean to “win” in Iraq? In other words, what events would have to happen, and/or what circumstances would have to come about that would cause President Bush (and others) to proclaim that we have won in Iraq, and consequently bring all (or most) of the troops home?
I’m asking because I genuinely don’t know; in all the talk about Iraq and reports about Iraq and discussions and arguments about Iraq, somehow I have missed what the criteria are that constitute a win.
I’d have to say that ‘winning’ would be peace, our troops come home, the Iraqis have free and fair elections and the country is stable enough to sell us their oil. Now, if you want to guess how likely those things are to happen…
You can’t win a war against a vague concept (terrorism) simply because there’s no finality to it. Unless they could round up all the terrorists and get them to sign a peace treaty of some sort (which I suppose is how most wars usually end), I don’t see there being an end.
It looks to me as if one of the short term goals (progress on security) has been met. The others really depend on the Iraqi Parliament. I’d say it’s in their hands now.
BrandonR, victory in Iraq and victory in the “War on Terror” are quite different concepts.
Since the OP has gotten a satisfactory answer, and politics are a subject better discussed in GD, I’ll close this one. Feel free to open in another forum if you desire.