In actual world politics, I think winning would be considered controlling the areas of the world that are significant to your particular nation and doing so peacefully. There probably wouldn't be a certain winning point but there could be a point in which most of the countries goals are slowly being accomplished, which could be considered winning. However, if the goals of a certain nation are being accomplished with much force, damaging lives and futures of various peoples, the "win" would not be legitimate. The more diplomacy involved in the accomplishments of the country, the closer they will become to "winning".
I think Paulina is correct in pointing out that to "win" may not just mean to achieve a goal. If a state adopts the mindset that the end justifies the means, then in reality their end may be illegitimate because they had such horrible means.
ReplyDelete