Tuesday, March 22, 2016

This, that, and t'other

A Pyrrhic victory is a victory that inflicts such a devastating toll on the victor that it is tantamount to defeat.
... then there's
The Rumsfeld Doctrine
Thomas L. Friedman of the New York Times has referred to the Rumsfeld Doctrine as one of "just enough troops to lose".
[The Rumsfeld Doctrine]
... and I'm a fan of
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”
[The Art of War]
We "won" in Afghanistan.
We "won" in Iraq.

Both these "victories" now look hollow.

In both cases we adhered to the "Rumsfeld Doctrine", which comes down to using high-tech weapons systems to avoid the use of "boots on the ground".
It doesn't really work to win the peace.

Are we, as a nation, willing to commit hundreds of thousands of troops to the Mideast to win the peace?

Does anyone have any better suggestions?

No comments:

Post a Comment