What is "winning" the war defined as; and why is it called a "war" when legally it is not?

Question

Restatement; why it is 'officially' termed "War In Iraq" when it is not technically a war?

Answer 1

winning=when the coalition leaves, Iraq can stand alone and remain on the map.  help them build themselves back to a stable power in the region.

war=technically it is a war.  the first gulf war never ended....saddam signed a "cease fire", and after ignoring the un(useful) resolutions, hostilities resumed.

my humble opinion.

Answer 2

Sadly,who in the US system has the Constitutional right to declare/wage war as defined is in fact NOT clear.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration...

Answer 3

What it would take to win this war has changed several times. At first it was to get rid of the WMD. OOPS, there was not any to be found so then it was to kill a dictator and impose democracy. Now I think we are just trying to beat any fight that is left out of the population.

Answer 4

"Winning" in Iraq would mean that Iraq had a free (by local standards) government with a free (by local standards) economy and a clean and non-corrupt (by local standards) economy and judiciary, that was a U.S. Ally.  Something akin to what Turkey was up until about 10 years ago, or what Qatar, Bahrain, and Kuwait already are, but with more democracy.

The ultimate objective is to turn Iraq into something more or less similar to what West Germany, and specifically West Berlin were during the cold war.  West Germany served not only as place where we could base U.S. troops, thus giving us a military presence throughout the area, it also served as a showplace for democratic, free market values.  People in Eastern Europe could pick up West German TV and they could see how people lived in the West. They could see that not only was there material prosperity, but there was also political and religious and economic freedom. They could watch the West German news casts and see how the West German police were different from the East German police. As time went on people saw that communisim was a load of B.S. and that is what helped lead to the revolutions of 1989 and the fall of the Soviet Union.

If we are able to do something more or less similar in Iraq, the hope is that people in Iran, Syria, Egypt, Pakistan and other Arab and/or Islamic nations will see a stable, non-corrupt, functional, secular, civil society....something that does not currently exist in most of the Arab world. Over time this will, it is hoped, lead the Arabs to decide they want something like that for themselves, and this will bring about a reformation of their society...sort of like what happened in the Soviet Union.

The Arab world has really lost it's way...in the 19th and 20th Century it was all colonized by one power or another. After WWII it jumped on the Totalitarian/Socialist bandwagon as a way of "progress", and things just got worse. Then when the Soviet Union fell apart they were left high and dry.  That is why fundamentalist Islam is so powerful in so much of the Islamic world. Arabs look and see tiny Israel humiliating and destroying their armies, time and time again. They see Israel, Europe, the USA and now even China and India getting rich, and (aside from oil money) they aren't.  The Arab nations that do not have oil are horribly poor, weak, screwed up, and generally ruled by tyrants and dictators.  The Arab nations that do have oil are rich, weak, screwed up and generally ruled by absolute monarchs.  Iran is Persian, not Arab but it somehow managed to wind up with Oil, but still poor, weak, screwed up, and ruled by Islamic tyrants.  People see they are messed up, and they want another way. Right now increasing numbers are turning to fundamentalist Islam as that way...because the idea is that "back when we took Islam seriously (the middle ages) things were better for us".

The ultimate objective in Iraq would be for some sort of functional Islamic democracy to arise, that would show the Arab world that they have other options, that they can build  a modern, progressive, and (by local standards) tollerant and open society, while still remaining Islamic and Arab...in the hopes that the model will spread on its own to other nations in the area.

These people are NOT Jeffersonian Democrats. They have a totally different cultural and political experience than we do...so progress will be slow and imperfect at best. You aren't going to see an Iraqi Jewish communty restored, ever, and you won't see the place turn into a liberal democracy of tollerance and peace and people singing Kumbyah and having g*y Pride marches in Basra.  People over in that part of the world are still uncomfortable with ideas like "women are people too, you should teach them to read, let them drive, and no you can't sell them like you do goats."   (I'm not kidding, a Major I know was actually asked by a Saudi officer "How much do you want for that blonde Lieutenant that works for you?" )  You will still have crime, you will still have problems there after we "win".  Lots of idiots of the National Public Radio type like to criticize what has been done there on the grounds it's not perfect.  (Like New York was a functional, crime free society before a Republican got elected mayor....)  Perfect isn't achieveable here, and perfect isn't the objective.  Better than what was there before, stable, self sustaining, and moving in the right direction is.

Answer 5

Winning the war?

Decode this lyrics "Sealed with a kiss"

Is to check-mate living human kind with self lack of knowledge for good in time.

With the Liberation of Freedom.

For the good of man-kind.

In making this world a better place to live in time.

With the creation of peace on earth goodwill to men for the little ones out there in time.

Exodus 13.21

Exodus 20.1-7

Leviticus 26.1, 13

Exodus 23.24,32

Leviticus 26.30-41

Luke 24.44-45

Matt 22.17-21

Luke 16.13

Luke 6.39-40,41-45,46-49

John 8.44

Matt 23.27

Matt 22.32

Sure?

It's illegal?

Decode this lyrics " Bad moon rising"

With "War of the world"

After having seen two moons in time?

Luke 21.8-10

Luke21.30-33

What do you think?

Answer 6

Sorry to said that but u can't find old school wars anymore, no one send a declaration of war to opponents. only ordinary joe's use does terms .. like war, like peace, Win or Loose.

Big Brain Technicians who working for earth governements and armys prefer the use different terms like conflict - limited engagement - tactical operation blah..blah.

As u know those soft butts scumbags had lot of power at the battlefields at now (thnx to digital technology) they doesn't breath razor sharp smell from dead bodies like u ; but they always had capacity for send brand new tactics to us  "peons" who fight at front lines.

They going home after drink some at local pub ; when u laid a bunker ..  under the enemy fire.

They had brain edicated well with govermental money, they use those brains well too.

Like our "peons" helmets and gut's.

Side's isn't clear at technicians brain,they don't care civilians - human causalties or loose gear paid by ordinary joe's.

Media Coverage and Reach The Tactical Focus Point .. nothing important then this two achiwements.

U can't see any enemy flags at the horizon, if u saw a small spark at far .. this mean u are targeting by a sniper, u can put a wet kiss for goodbye to your lovely butt  A.S.A.P ..  BAM .. one more peon dawn, send his remains back to country, end of the story for him.

Allies change the side quickly at technnicians tactical maps and minds, and no one doesn't care geneva convention rules for PoW's. "Hey there is no ******* official war here .. it's a military engagement and those **** heads isn't soldiers, I see some terrorist thats all ..  who ******* care geneva bull ****?" said by them.

Soldiers mean almost nothing, just some numbers for them .. they check casualty reports when drink coffee late's at rooms with A/C's. Before daily and important tactical conferences ..

That's why there is no "WINNER" around .. only survivors can find.

Technicians focus only reach the specific targets like ( for Iraq )

- capture saddam / done  ( focus point : Hail the god's of media )

- destroy the internal balance points / done ( focus point : crush the country to the smaller parts .. reason / small parts can't rezist well )

- take the control of goverment for change the local laws / done ( focus point : take the oil rights .. amen )

- make a deal with locals for bases ( focus point : more oil .. who said greed one of the big sin's ? ) .. etc.

No one try to found a pole for hang a flag like Iwo Jima , no more peace agreement with sword deliverance ceremony's, no more "respect" the enemies who die when defend his motherland.

If u want a see old style clear END GAME / U ARE A WINNER situation, u can't see any at Iraq or modern dirty and small wars from today ..

Sorry but no more shiney knights around, only businessman's who wear black suits u can find there.

Businessman's who sell human flesh and blood for gain more and more.

Answer 7

This administration is very prone to an Alice in Wonderland Syndrome where words mean exactly what they want them to mean without regard to a dictionary.  "Mission Accomplished" is a prime example, "The economy is basically sound" is another, "interrogation" means torture, "war in Iraq" means invasion of another country without provocation, "we will not meet with terrorist nations" (meaning Iran) (inferring that anyone who proposes doing so is insane)  means nothing but rhetoric because they just did meet with Iran, "winning the war" has not meaning whatsoever, and on and on.  It's a version of "the big lie told often enough".