Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
Jon Huntsman for President
It was the USA's second major defeat. The first being the glorious voctory of FIDEL CASTRO and the CUBAN people at the bay of Pigs.
Vietnam won of course. To say anything different would be lying to yourself. What some people don't want to admit is that the world, the United States, and Vietnam probably would have been much better off we never got involved in the first place.
Just as communisms failure to account for human nature represents an inherent design flaw in the system, so too does any military strategy that fails to account for the effects of domestic politics. We lost Vietnam, yep, say it yourselves. "We lost a war." You can debate the causes all you want, but you can't change the facts.
Vietnam was a victory for the wroking man over imperialist yellow dogs.
- Colonel Paul YinglingNobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.
Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.
All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.