Thread by @JMichaelWaller

'No strategy for victory. At least, not for the Good Guys.' My take on why the Pentagon has no definition of 'strategy' or 'victory.' jewishpolicycenter.org/2021/10/13/no-…

2) Excerpt: 'Victory,' as the Pentagon defines it in its Dictionary of Military & Associated Terms, is – well, it’s not there.

It doesn’t exist.

The Pentagon has no official definition of victory.

The very word itself doesn’t appear once in the more than 350-page dictionary.

3) "the Pentagon dictionary has no definition for 'enemy.'

"The hole is right there on page 74, like a missing tooth, between 'enduring location' and 'engage.'

"No enemy."

4) The DoD Dictionary "reflects a mindset inculcated through generations of officers and senior civilians across the military services and Defense Department. It reveals a dumbing down of the Pentagon’s view of its role in national defense."

5) "Strategy ... is no longer strategic. The DoD Dictionary calls strategy 'A prudent idea or set of ideas for employing the instruments of national power in a synchronized and integrated fashion to achieve theater, national, and/or multinational objectives.'

"A prudent idea."

6) "That’s pretty dumbed down from, say [Webster's]... which simply but elegantly is 'the science and art of employing the political, economic, psychological, and military forces of a nation or group of nations to afford the maximum support to adopted policies in peace and war.'"

7) Where in the war plan did it say that we would return Afghanistan back to the terrorists? Who designed the end state to fight and die in Afghanistan, with its colossal and virtually untapped riches of rare earth minerals vital to our economy, and hand it all over to China?

8) "Do we even have a real counterterrorism strategy? The FBI has a $10 million reward for information leading to the arrest of the notorious Sirajuddin Haqqani, yet the President of the United States enabled Haqqani to return home to run Afghanistan’s internal security forces."

9) "No serious strategist of either party in our government publicly identified the state sponsors of 9/11 and laid out a strategy to take the fight to the source of the terrorism that plagued us.

"We knew it then, of course." Qatar, Iran, Pakistan, elements of Saudi Arabia.

10) "Without strategy, our leaders make decisions to pump the Kremlin with European cash while making our NATO allies on continental Europe dependent on Vladimir Putin for energy and pulling the rug from under Ukraine and unflinching NATO ally Poland."

11) "Without strategy, we built up Communist China from agrarian backwater to an economic and military superpower with the confidence to threaten Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Vietnam, Taiwan, India, and more...."

12) "... We stood by Beijing as it held us hostage through economic warfare, political subversion, and seemingly endless technological, financial, and political espionage."

13) While President Trump "pitched and yawed the country through a lurching, often illogical set of foreign and national security policies that could hardly be called strategic, he did articulate a worldview that helped others shape a new and coherent grand strategy...."

14) Trump's "America First approach to the world, so annoyingly simplistic to his globalist critics in both parties ... forced the nation to confront the fact that team America could no longer sustain its role as world police."

15) "certain able figures on [Trump's NSC] staff devised a remarkable National Strategy of the United States that was more coherent, comprehensive, and crystalline than any since President Ronald Reagan. But it was too little, too late, for Trump’s often squandered presidency."

Postscript: Biden does have a coherent grand strategy. It has nothing to do with securing national defense and everything to do with fundamental transformation of America: Pronouns, COVID mandates, compulsory transgenderism, global warming, diversity-inclusion-equity.