Since WWII have there been any wars that have been "won"?

[maveric]

Bu$h and his cronies are always talking about "winning" in Iraq, without entailing how that would come about.
How many wars have been "won" since WWII?
I can think of a couple. The Falklands war and possibly Viet Nam and Afghanistan over the Soviets.

Can a war actually be "won", anymore?

[Amonester]

1. I know Viet Nam was "won" by the people of Viet Nam.

That's how it "looks like" today anyway... although, no government is perfect.

Also, the "war" against the Milosevic government of Serbia (a bombing campaign).

[loyalsister]

2. A different question

Is "win" a relevant word when discussing our role in another country's war?

[Critters2]

3. The great war against Grenada!! nt

[maveric]

4. Oh yeah. That great victory.

Would Gulf War I count as a "win"?

[Az]

5. War has become ideological rather than territorial

The upshot is that you will find yourself fighting local ideals rather than entrenched governments. Lopping off the head does nothing to change the local mindset. In fact it merely cements the opposition of the local population.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

6. Can violence destroy hatred, injustice and or ignorance?? n/t

[B Calm]

7. Korea is still a divided nation.. I wouldn't call Falklands a war, more

of a police action.

[Ian David]

8. Panama, Grenada, Bosnia. n/t

[theoldman]

9. Some wars are won by non military actions or by what I would call

revolutions. South Africa and Uganda are examples. How about the breakup of the Soviet union?

[sweetheart]

10. winning is losing, is part of management theory

the exogenous other, omitted from western thinking,
and all those un-considered externalities, sadly,
require a playground for externality, such are war industries,
demanding testing nations and supression areas for weapons systems.

[sweetheart]

11. an all out war has not been fought

There has *never* been a test of nuclear war systems in an all out war, there have
been simulations, and exercises, but these don't survive first contact with the
enemy, and that contact has already begun through the totality of technology
miniaturization, and creative human beings who's survival depends on deterring these
'long known' and studied systems. A series of secret anti-systems surely exist that
are staggering for their innovations, especially in robotic seeker mines - fish, and
sea-bed communications... allowing sea-bed silos.

A war's opponent has an arsenal that runsfeld calls 'the known unknown', that
respresents this believed opposition, yet even since those assessments, a mobile phone,
a solar panel and a little plastic motor could robotically send a bomb across a harbor.

If society has speeded up since ww2, then so has military. IN that sense, the maginot line
was a fixed battlement deemed innefective by mobile forces, and today, given 100x speedups,
the ships and tanks of yesterday, are the fixed battlment, and the mobile forces are indivdiual
persons with guided missiles, and robotic mines. Computer simulations probably could target
with strong likelihood enemy firing locations, and these mined on the seabed already with
local seekers.... seabed heat seekers of the nuclear plume, and an arsenal is sunk....

[treestar]

12. Wars nowadays cannot be "won"

It is freeper fantasy.

[Gabi Hayes]

13. here's one that's just about over:

the war against the US middle class

[sakabatou]

14. These days it's very hard to see a "won war"

And I doubt that any war can be "won." But then again, people might change the definition. However, even though I really doubt it.

[Bigmack]

15. Two words describe best how ...

The US "won" WWII.

Those words... "Volkswagen" and "Toyota". Huge-selling companies from our WWII enemies. Now part of the American road.... bigger than the American car companies soon.

Nobody wins wars... things just re-align for a while.

[sutz12]

16. Winning is so "20th Century"

It's not whether you win or lose, it's how you finance the game.

:sarcasm:.........or is it? :shrug: