Quote Originally Posted by wm View Post
Who should win is one thing that we may comment on, but, as outsiders, we really do not get to have a vote. The populace of the country gets to make that call. As I said before, perhaps not too clearly, we might play a role in trying to make sure that whatever choice they make is not coerced; this however, is only morally permissible, not morally required. Morally, we may not direct what choice they decide to make; they need to use their own free will. Nation states are not children; paternalism has no place here.

What we choose to do for pragmatic reasons may very well be different from what we ought to do for moral reasons. The thing about making today's pragmatic right choice is that it often ends up being the wrong choice in the long term--this is the moral of the Prisoner's Dilemma, which was touched on in discussions on this thread.
And, of course, my contention is that we need to get over the idea that we have to "win." We need to seek the quickest and most sustainable end to the conflict even if that does not constitute a clear "win." We need to think of counterinsurgency as more like peacekeeping than like warfighting.

The huge problem with that, I realize, is convincing Congress and the families who sacrifice their sons and daughters that an outcome that is something less than a clear, unambiguous win (which is, after all, the American way) is in everyone's interest.