|
|
|
|
|
|
by surgical_fire
457 days ago
|
|
|
> Only after a voluntary retreat A voluntary retreat is not a victory. You are arguing it is, which is extremely odd. > Of course it was a victory. The Taliban were ousted within weeks and then the place was under US control for 20 years. If the victory conditions were to be bogged down for 20 years wasting resources in an occupation that netted no benefits, only to have your enemy be back in the following day when you do your voluntary retreat, those are the most retarded victory conditions ever spelled out. It would be like claiming victory against the Nazis if after some years both the US and USSR left Germany, and in the following day the Nazis were setting up concentration camps again. |
|
|
If I come in to your country, invade it, and have complete dominion for 20 years, than I've successfully invaded your country. Victoriously.
If I then change my mind and decide to leave, after 20 years of having a provisional government because I got bored, then yeah, my victory still stands, and the rest is details and semantics.
> It would be like claiming victory against the Nazis if after some years both the US and USSR left Germany, and in the following day the Nazis were setting up concentration camps again.
If they had held dominion over the Nazis for the entire time they were there and left voluntarily because they felt all of a sudden it wasn't there fight, it wouldn't be wrong to do so.