The President just said, "victory will have a clear definition." Who can say what that definition is - and is it achievable ?

2017-08-21T21:43:06-04:00

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Aug 21 at 2017 9:45 PM

2017-08-21T21:45:56-04:00

Him.

Response by SPC James Harsh made Aug 21 at 2017 10:09 PM

2017-08-21T22:09:39-04:00

it probably involves doing some things, perhaps helping the armies of the local populace with methods otherwise not used often? will they respect or fear us if/when things happen.. How will media at home narrate going forward, they always have pleasant things to say

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Aug 21 at 2017 10:43 PM

2017-08-21T22:43:14-04:00

AND ON AND ON and ON. The piece of crap government we installed won't last a week after we're gone. The Taliban want revenge on General Dotsum and his Mercenaries and might even spead the war into Tadjikistan

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 21 at 2017 11:05 PM

2017-08-21T23:05:14-04:00

I thought it was lame how Trump made a big point of stating upfront that he was going against his instincts. That way if nothing changes, he can throw the generals under the bus and say he knew they were wrong, but wanted to give them a chance because they are supposed to be the experts. Just like he did with that SEAL raid that lost a SEAL, he said "that was the generals deal. I signed off on it, but they planned it". Or when his second muslim ban EO ran into trouble, and he said "I wanted to defend the first one, not this watered down one the DOJ came up with" .

Response by SGT Mike Taylor made Aug 21 at 2017 11:32 PM

2017-08-21T23:32:34-04:00

The enemy dictates when they accept defeat. One side cannot declare victory if the other is still making bullets fly and the body count rise. As an N+1, very recently entire ODA from 19th Group in Utah was nearly taken out in RC-East not too long ago, 1 KIA 11 WIA.

There are two ways to defeat the enemy. One is a full-on 4GW assault against the enemy relating to politics, economics, G7 ops, subversion, and decentralized C2 in small unit tactics down to the fire team level. With a micromanaging higher, this will not happen nor is pragmatic. Sec. Mattis is versed in this, and perhaps there will be a shift after the President's wonderful speech this evening.

There is one other way, however Americans - both civilian and military - might not be able to stomach it.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 22 at 2017 9:03 AM

2017-08-22T09:03:33-04:00

There's only one definition for the word victory that I'm aware of...

Response by CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 22 at 2017 9:24 AM

2017-08-22T09:24:45-04:00

Victory is whatever achieves you goal(s). He may not have clearly defined what those were, but was clear on the issue of no longer telegraphing our actions. Sometimes victory can be simply doing nothing, depending on the goals. If words instead of deeds get the job done then it is a victory. I'm not sure the public understands what the actual problems are in Afghanistan. It is extremely complicated because it involves the will of the people there as well as their future. Time will tell if we are doing any good there but 16 years in it is easy to be skeptical.

Response by Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth made Aug 22 at 2017 9:42 AM

2017-08-22T09:42:19-04:00

The only people that need to know what the outcome is are is the senior leaders. Ours at the rank and file is to go and do. The American people don't need a clear definition because...guess what...that can change with world events and if they narrow it down to a date or a specific timeline and it is shorter the American people will state the we underestimated the Afghans, if it is longer they will say we overestimated the timeline and we were wrong...timelines are hard to meet because things change. When Afghanistan can stand on their own with their own established government from their own people and aren't harboring and training terrorists then maybe that is the goal and victory. We will just have to trust in all of our leadership and let the Generals fight the wars...at least Trump is letting them do that. They know what they need to be successful and I guarantee Mattis has a victory goal in place with a strategy to get there or he wouldn't commit.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 22 at 2017 10:01 AM

2017-08-22T10:01:58-04:00

I would like to know how "victory" will be defined in Afghanistan after 16 years. I honestly think we should just leave. There's no point to be there. The Taliban will just take back over after we leave. There's no point to be there. At all.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 22 at 2017 10:25 AM

2017-08-22T10:25:38-04:00

its not going to happen, terrain and gorilla warfare tactics over there are the main factor and a reason we are not going to succeed.

Response by LT Mike Folker made Aug 22 at 2017 12:15 PM

2017-08-22T12:15:46-04:00

Doesn't "victory" already have a definition? Evidently, not in vast black hole that is the military-industrial-congressional-media complex.
Ret. CMC Gen. Shoup told the Senate Cmte. in April 1968 that there'd be no victory in Vietnam if our troops did not invade N. Vietnam: not that an invasion would guarantee victory, but he knew then that there were not nor would there be any plans for that.
It's all too apparent that these so-called wars will continue indefinitely because just too many people (admirals, generals; elected officials, political appointees; contractors) have a profit stake in this "foreverness." & The general public feverishly awaits the next definition of victory.

Response by MSgt James Mullis made Aug 22 at 2017 3:15 PM

2017-08-22T15:15:55-04:00

Anyone who can come up with a definitive measure of victory for any war is deserving of a Nobel Prize. Yes, It's easy to tell who wins a battle, that's a numbers game. However, its very hard to tell when you've won or even lost a war. The only real way ensure victory is through long term occupation as we have done in both Europe and Japan.

"To fight and conquer in all our battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting. Sun Tzu

Response by SSgt Boyd Welch made Oct 11 at 2017 12:31 PM

2017-10-11T12:31:08-04:00

Maybe the clear definition comes when we purpose to utterly destroy an enemy and their war-fighting capability and then we leave.....