The Good War
Yes, we're still in Afghanistan. But some guys with a lot of experience are saying it's time to go. And not in the "Let's Announce V-A Day" style, but rather with a grim acceptance that we've spent a lot of money and lost a lot of lives in an ultimately futile fight. Depressing stuff.
What are our candidates saying about Afghanistan? Newt hasn't said a lot, though he wants to address Afghanistan in a larger context (perhaps at the fundamental level). Mitt wants to listen to the generals (anyone in particular?). Rick wants to commit to a winning strategy (TBA). You don't need a link for Ron Paul.
It's not surprising that the (non-Paul) candidates don't have strong positions on Afghanistan; most Americans don't either (and to the extent people have opinions, they do not seem to be positive). But candidate Obama had a strong message when he ran for president, and he's stuck to it: additional combat power for a short while, followed by withdrawal as fast as possible.
Compare Michael Yon et al. with our potential commanders-in-chief in 2013 and beyond. Who's likely to get us out of a doomed effort in Afghanistan? What result in Afghanistan is the good, conservative result--economically, socially, culturally, strategically? Do the American people care enough about Afghanistan for a candidate to gain traction on the war?
Is there anything good to say about Afghanistan?
- Comment (28)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Sep '10
Re: The Good War
A bit of honesty would be in order. Bush negotiated our surrender in Iraq and now the GOP is finding fault with Obama for not renegotiating it. In the beginning of Afghanistan Bush failed to use the necessary force to kill OBL the other terrorist leaders and it has been a story of fighting not to lose since. The only real question is what will the surrender look like. I thought Vietnam had taught the lesson that if you can't win a war and win it quickly don't get in it. Bush might have missed this having spent that war on a bar stool in a stateside "O" club.
May '11
Re: The Good War
Are you getting your cup of coffee's worth, Lying Jim?
When I left Afghanistan, I was grateful that President Obama had not cancelled the buildup that President Bush provided for, and I understood the wisdom of selecting a big ol' squish like Gates in order to provide some continuity. I have friends who died there, and I still think we could have done much better.
This President went even to the ridiculous lengths of asking Petraeus to reprise a role from his past because Obama had no better idea than to do what had worked for Bush. Then, with the south fairly nailed down, and with everybody from Petraeus on down planning the pivot east, he pulled up stakes.
We have lost much in Afghanistan, and we have gained much. This President is now sabotaging what was gained, which is only appropriate if he can raise the dead. Perhaps when he is finished lowering the seas.
Afghanistan was never a lost cause until recently. All it required was for the good guys to be convinced that we would stick it out for a long hard fight, and that the bad guys be convinced of the exact same thing.
Apr '11
Re: The Good War
Is there anything good to say about Afghanistan? Sure there is. Though we originally went there to deal out retribution, we stayed there because of the better angels of our nature. We thought by staying we could make some very poor people's lives better.
Some time ago,around 1991 I think, Lee Kwan Yew was being badgered by an interviewer from Foreign Affairs magazine to say something critical about United States policy in Asia. An exasperated Lee finally barked (and I'm quoting from distant memory here.)
"You want me to say something bad about America and I'm not going to do it. This is the most powerful country in history and yet after utterly defeating it's enemies in war [Germany & Japan], rather than grinding them into the dirt, reached down and raised them up to be her equal and in someways more than her equal. That's never happened before."
In the end we may not succeed in raising Afghanistan up or leading her people into the modern world. But I, for one, am not at all ashamed that we tried.
Jan '12
Re: The Good War
As an occasional analyst, I'd like to make few points here. A President's strength and level of professionalism and dexterity is undoubtedly directly and strongly interrelated to the extent of value, importance, and priority that he gives to international and foreign affairs and policies and the strategies that his would-be Government would exercise. The three candidates named above have not said a single significant word about their foreign policy in case they engage the country as a president. For a country like US, slightest change or modification in any policy in terms of foreign engagement can have serious and huge national consequences. These consequences have been experimented by the people of America during the presidency of Mr Obama & Mr Bush. These consequences are deadly for some families in the US. Having said this, the US nation must seriously consider a candidate's conduct in terms of foreign policy and engagements because that will later on affect their life and the changes are undoable. Since the foreign engagement strategy of a government directly affects the national situation, hence, the more a president has a great foreign policy conduct, the best situation will the homeland affairs have. Sincerely, Editor of @combatjourno
Jul '10
Re: The Good War
Afghanistan has not been run like a proper colonial exercise. Had we done that, we might have kicked out the Taliban in 2001 and claimed our laws the law of the land, ending the chattel condition of women, abolishing child marriages, and protecting the several dozen remaining non-Muslims. Instead, in the State Department's wisdom, we established a Sharia-compliant Islamic Republic where rape victims are put on death row, converts shot, homosexuals stoned, and women treated like they always have been.
The problem is not that we are "attempting to force our customs" on other cultures. That's laughable. If only! We haven't even bothered trying that! Had we done so, in the British Empire's spirit, Afghanistan might have been different. Needless to say, I think nation-building is a waste.
Nov '10
Re: The Good War
COIN has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult, and left untried.
Feb '11
Re: The Good War
Some of the Afghan people are willing to take casualties for decades and the United States and its allies are not. If has always be this way. Leave
Edited on Jan 23 at 6:18amMay '11
Re: The Good War
I always wanted to stop a mounted patrol, have one truck full of guys go into a shop and get coffee, helmets off, gloves off, while the rest pull security. Do that five times in a month in Mazar-e-Sharif, and watch the reports roll in about where the bad guys are. And drink some really good coffee.
May '11
Re: The Good War
Herkybird, can you lay fingers on that article (with the Yew quote)? I have been searching for one in which he describes the failure of America to believe in American exceptionalism. He lays at the feet of the Clinton administration the decision to become "just one country among many" when by rights, the world rather expected us to keep up the good fight.
I have also been searching the web for a picture which I could swear ran on CNN.com of a crowd of people running through the streets of Dili carrying a huge American flag with the word HELP written across it.
That was shortly before werefused to help and many of them were tortured and killed, as was predicted, in the wake of the miserable UN-sponsored "referendum" in independence. All we would have had to do is park a ship in the harbor and ignore Indonesian demands that we leave.
By the time my ship finally arrived, all there was left to do was rebuild houses where the killing had been done. So, yes, I'm an interventioninst.
The motto on my blog is "Freedom is wasted on him who will not make others free".
May '11
Re: The Good War
The point to learn here is that there is nothing in Afghanistan worth sticking around for. They have no resources, they have no skills, they have no educated population. The people are, to be blunt, savages with little to recommend them.
It's time to go. Instead of punishing them and making them sorry for hosting the murderers that attacked us, we tried to help them. But we didn't bring them the Bill of Rights. We let them keep their oppression.
Outside Camp Leatherneck is a growing population on land that has never been lived on. The base was chosen because it was away from populations. But the thousands of people who have moved there live in squalor. We wanted to help them, but the Central government refuses to permit anyone to buy the land. So we can't build schools or sewage treatment for them (try it and the Generals will get you). So they live in squalor and look at us with contempt for not helping them while we live in grand style and tell them of a rosy promise land to come.
It's time to go because we don't know why we're there.
Apr '11
Re: The Good War
It's not so much is hasn't been tried as it is that much of what General Petraeus identified as Counter Insurgency (COIN) activities in his outstanding manual on the subject are not really within the competence of a military organization. The military is an offensive force that excels at providing security. When they stray from that task things become muddled. The humanitarian activities are really the province of civilian organizations like Save the Children. Medicins sans Frontieres and, dare I say it?, UN Agencies like the World Food Programme, UNICEF, the Food & Agriculture Organization (FAO) and even the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) since so much depends on air transport these days.
The United States is an Imperial Nation but we are not a colonizing one. There's nothing wrong with that. Sometimes, however, I wish we'd not be so shy about championing the values upon which we were founded as an example to others.
Apr '11
Re: The Good War
Sorry, I don't have the copy of that issue any more. But I'm sure you could find in the Foreign Affairs archive. I can't imagine that there are that many Lee Kwan Yew interviews. My best recollection is the interview was around 1991.
Sep '10
Re: The Good War
First thank you for your service. Your point about both sides needing to be convinced we would stick it out is 100% correct. In 67/68 those of us in Vietnam were convinced the Pols in DC would eventually cut and run, so was the enemy. I have no first hand knowledge of either Afg. or Irq so I cannot say if the majority of troops or citizens believe we will do what is necessary. I think it is clear in Iraq we will not and building up force size 7 years after fighting began in Afg. does not fit my description of fighting to win and most likely was done to avoid defeat. Armies don't go to war nations do. Perhaps if people of you and your friends character occupied positons in Congress and the WH we would have the element that is lacking to win.
Regrettably we do not. Once again thank you for your service.
Jun '10
Re: The Good War
Let this be a lesson in the dangers of wading into a tribal society and trying to impose modernity on a medieval mindset. We should have known that statehood was out of reach for these people. The various factions will now return to the fratricide and savagery that characterizes their culture. But it will be their misery, not ours.
Mar '11
Re: The Good War
Any ideas what Newt or Mitt or Rick would actually do about Afghanistan? Is there any point in changing the Obama strategy of rapid withdrawal? My sense is that any change would be largely cosmetic, outside of maybe keeping special forces in the country. I can't see a conservative case for staying in Afghanistan.
Nov '11
Re: The Good War
Seems like what we should demand from candidates is coherent positions, especially on foreign policy, and if we don't get them, we should withhold our votes.
So if the other three candidates can't be bothered to study the issue enough to formulate a policy position, why do people keep damning Ron Paul for his?
Agree or disagree, at least RP has done what a statesman is supposed to do: Formulated a coherent policy that we don't even need a link for because we know what it is.
May '11
Re: The Good War
No. It was not out of reach. But we didn't bring them individual rights and freedom. We left them oppressed. We could have helped them, but we didn't want to upset the oppressors. It makes me ashamed that I was there standing up for a culture that believes in raping little boys and executing women for the crime of being a rape victim. Our government abused us and allowed the Afghan rulers to continue their oppression with our blessing.
Mar '11
Re: The Good War
Fred Cole: Seems like what we should demand from candidates is coherent positions, especially on foreign policy, and if we don't get them, we should withhold our votes.
So if the other three candidates can't be bothered to study the issue enough to formulate a policy position, why do people keep damning Ron Paul for his?
Agree or disagree, at least RP has done what a statesman is supposed to do: Formulated a coherent policy that we don't even need a link for because we know what it is. · 25 minutes ago
I've always had the impression Ron Paul's foreign policy was dangerous (and if you listen to the Ricochet podcast there's no question about it). But he seems to be indisputably right about Afghanistan as things stand now.
May '11
Re: The Good War
Jim, don't go all soft on us now. You started by charging in all snark and anger, and I would expect you to leave the same way. Semper Lib.
Jan '11
Re: The Good War
For about twenty years (1959-1978) Afghanistan looked, at least from the outside, like a real state that was open to modernizing. Was that all an illusion? I admit I wasn't paying close attention, so if somebody better informed tells me it was just a superficial gloss on Kabul while the rest of the country was in chaos, I can't argue.
But if it was real - can they get back there? Or have two ten-year wars and the rise of militant Islam destroyed any possibility of peace and stability?