At what point is a war LOST?

Question

Or can that vary depending upon the reasons you are at war?But the objective is always the same and that is to win! Yet at what cost and what amount of sacrafice are you willing to give for a victory? Now I guess that can also vary depending upon how important the cause is you are fighting for?.............I'm beginning to ramble on here but it was something I started thinking about, give me your thoughts?

Answer 1

I would guess the first requirement is to be in a war. I personally think we won the war a few years ago and now are trying to secure a peace.

"Watch what people are cynical about, and one can often discover what they lack."
- General George Patton Jr

Answer 2

The war is lost a-priori. If the public must be lied to in order to persuade it to kill thousands and destabilize a whole fragile region, then it is already lost!
If fear must be instilled in the media in order to cover or manipulate results, then the invasion of someone else's ground is a sad event.
If the occupiers of someone else's nation are not immediately financing reconstruction by the country's own labor force with the country's own materials and brain power, then, the war was in vain.
If the people of the destroyed country cannot feel more secure, then all is lost. Including the credibility of the war strategists.
If most of the land resources go to the spoils of war, into foreign funds, then the morality of the project is in doubt.

To win what? win over some new friends, oops, then all is lost.....

Answer 3

Yes cause is very importane and that too an 'open' cuase !! For wining a war, one should be at war on first place.........and
"war is armed hostilities between the two nations"...........Well if both the sides are not armed and one side consist of just civilians then it is called illegal occupation..........not a war !! And Failure of war is when most of your policies come to a blind end and none of them could do any good !! And the place you are invading would reject you totally !! Also when your own nation get against you.........so you will have to face the two sided attacks...and at this situation a "sensible" leader would admit that yes i have failed and i should re- consider my decisions ! and a stupid person would say, "I would go on even if my own nation reject my policies" and this would ultimatley bring a great damage to the nation even !! I wish every country could get a "sensible" president and this world would definitely become peaceful !

Answer 4

A war is lost when one side loses the will to fight. It doesn't matter how many or how severe the military defeats one side may suffer, the war hasn't really ended until they finally give it up. Similarly, it doesn't matter how great the military superiority of one side, if they lack the will to use that power.

Wars are thus won or lost in all kinds of ways, because what it takes to convince one population to give up and stop fighting can be very different from what it takes to convince a different population.

Answer 5

NO ONE ever wins a war. There are just bigger loosers and the "small losers" get to write history. It is somewhat like the old gunfighters, sooner or later, there is one that is better than they.

It is beyond my comprehension how a people can loose thousands of their youths (that is the future) and probably more older civilians in a war and still think they won the war (not to mention national treasures).

The human race is the only species that goes to war, have you ever seen animals go to war.

Answer 6

I'm guessing you're specifically referring to Iraq? The sick part is, that war has already been won. The dictator was toppled, and the area was thoroughly searched for any weapons that might be a threat to our interests. We can now say with certainty that there aren't any. We even gave them the opportunity to adopt a more advanced form of government, but they seem to primitive to accept it yet. That's not our problem.

War must be won at any cost, because losing costs even more. The problem is, we've already won. What's left over shouldn't be our problem.

Answer 7

A war is lost (in my opinion) when the primary goal is discovered to unatainable. At that point, it's just a matter of deciding how best to withdraw with the least amount of additional damage done to the parties involved.

Answer 8

Victory depends upon the overall objective. So when you change the objective, it only follows that the definition of victory has changed. Remember it has been 4 years since dummy declared "Mission Accomplished". And as we all see that is BU ll SH it. But what's new?

Answer 9

In the past, the war stops when the winner has control over what controls the people.

In our present, the war stops when the winner has control over what controls the people, like complete financial control over the largest GNP (oil).

Read about the history of our World Bank and then you will know what controls our modern wars.

Answer 10

The Iraqi war was lost the moment we invaded.

That moron in the White House doesn't have a clue about mid-eastern thought, especially when he starts throwing terms like "Crusade" around.

The middle east is driven and controlled by Islam, which is why they look at what we've done as a "holy war." It doesn't have to make sense to us, it makes sense to them in their world.

Bush is probably the worst president in US history, and is a traitor to the Constitution.

Answer 11

You ask a great question. I'm very interested in what others have to say on this... My two-cents? I think when over half the country realizes what a debacle a war has become, it's time to coordinate a strategic withdrawl.

Sorry if this offends you--I actually believe in democracy and what my country thinks! You could say I'm rather "patriotic."