at the end of the war (1945) and were still fighting intensely in many areas of the island in 1946, they would have not won.
If the war is still in progress... free elections will resolve nothing (and what is the Bush Republican predeliction for partial elections - cough *Florida* cough). Elections in only those places that are "pacified" will be taken to mean, elections in only those who are supporting the US... which is not Freedom.
GWB started the war. He has not won the war. He is currently, according to multiple media sources, losing the war.
If he holds the "partial elections", he will have a pretext of a "freed" Iraq, and can abandon it... perhaps. Abandoning the war means you lost it.
The US is not currently sending more troops in... well, maybe only during voting (see original link)...
If you are losing a war and fail to reinforce, are you not admitting victory is impossible?
If you have not, and never can, pacify the land, you have not won. Starting a war and not winning is not a really good election platform, in most countries.
Outcomes of war:
Defeat
Victory
Stalemate
Negotiated peace (which requires real peace to be an outcome)
Demolition of one or more participating nations (most likely outcome of Iraq war)
According to Rumsfeld, It looks like Victory is off the list on this war. |
