Originally posted by Montezuma
The objectives and constraints for a military campaign are ALWAYS determined by political leaders. By your logic the military has never won a war either.
Well, I guess your statement would be true if it weren't so totally and inescapably false.
For your statement to be true, I'd have had to say that the loss could never be blamed on the military. But, I didn't say a military defeat could not be blamed on the military. Of course it could. What I said was taht the military on the ground were not allowed to win the fight. There is a difference, but then who am I to tell Monte, the once and great logician.
Your "logic" is flawed too because you would suggest that political leaders win war. Nope, wrong again, but not quite so completely as before, so there is hope for you I think.
If a war has been won, a) the fight has been won by the military warfighters, b) the populace has supplied and supported the military warfighters, c) the political leaderhsip convinced the populace to make the sacrifices necessary to win the war. and allowed the warfighters to fight the war instead of micromanaging the war effort for political purposes.
War is a group effort but when you are looking for cause and effect in a lost battle or war, it is clear that a military force can fight all the battles it is assinged brilliantly, and kill many many of the nme, but if the politcal leaders say don't go here, don't go there, then the war is lost. But, that is not the fault of the military. At least not in my skewed logic, it isn't.
