While the initial deployment of troops to Afghanistan in the immediate wake of 9-11 may have made some sense in terms of trying to break Al-Queda, that rational was long ago destroyed by the Chimperator and Palpatine Cheney's feckless and needless invasion of Iraq. The window of opportunity in Afghanistan was lost and it is not likely to be reclaimed. Relying on the military leadership's calls for more troops as a basis for political decisions is idiocy. Living in a region with a huge military presence and close contact with the military mindset of senior officers, there will NEVER be a time when the leadership will realistically admit that more troops and more spending are not the answer. Ultimately, their job is to wage wars and in an absence of a real war they are never content with make believe war games. Combine this reality with a knowledge of the history of Afghanistan and the inability of any foreign power to bring it under control over the course of more than 2,500 years, and Obama's decision to send 30,000 more U.S. troops is revealed as a fool's errand. Former Senator George McGoven has an op-ed piece in the Washington Post that looks at this reality. Here are some highlights:*
As a U.S. senator during the 1960s, I agonized over the badly mistaken war in Vietnam. After doing all I could to save our troops and the Vietnamese people from a senseless conflict, I finally took my case to the public in my presidential campaign in 1972. Speaking across the nation, I told audiences that the only upside of the tragedy in Vietnam was that its enormous cost in lives and dollars would keep any future administration from going down that road again.
*
I was wrong. Today, I am astounded at the Obama administration's decision to escalate the equally mistaken war in Afghanistan, and as I listen to our talented young president explain why he is adding 30,000 troops -- beyond the 21,000 he had added already -- I can only think: another Vietnam. I hope I am incorrect, but history tells me otherwise.
*
We have had tens of thousands of troops in Afghanistan for several years, and we have employed an even larger number of mercenaries (or "contractors," as they're called these days). As in Vietnam, the insurgent forces are stronger than ever, and the Afghan government is as corrupt as the one we backed in Saigon.
*
Why do we send young Americans to risk life and limb on behalf of such worthless regimes? The administration says we need to fight al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. But the major al-Qaeda forces are in Pakistan. The insurgency in Afghanistan is led by the Taliban. Its target is its own government, not our government.
*
Starting in 1979, the Soviets tried to control events in Afghanistan for nearly a decade. They lost 15,000 troops, and an even larger number of soldiers were crippled or wounded. Their treasury was exhausted, and the Soviet Union collapsed. A similar fate has befallen other powers that have tried to work their will on Afghanistan's collection of mountain warlords and tribes.
*
Even if we had a good case for a war in Afghanistan, we simply cannot afford to wage it. With a $12 trillion debt and a serious economic recession, this is not a time for unnecessary wars abroad. We should bring our soldiers home before any more of them are killed or wounded -- and before our national debt explodes.
*
Obama has the capacity to be a great president; I just hope that Afghanistan will not tarnish his message of change. After half a century of Cold War and hot wars, it is time to rebuild our great and troubled land. By closing down the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, we can divert the vast sums being spent there to revitalizing our own nation. In 1972, I called on my fellow citizens to "Come home, America." Today, I commend these words to our new president.
*
Having lived through the Vietnam era, I continue to have a sickening feeling of deja vue and wonder why our civilian leaders never seem to learn the lessons of history and go on to repeat the same mistakes while relying on the promises of military commanders.
As a U.S. senator during the 1960s, I agonized over the badly mistaken war in Vietnam. After doing all I could to save our troops and the Vietnamese people from a senseless conflict, I finally took my case to the public in my presidential campaign in 1972. Speaking across the nation, I told audiences that the only upside of the tragedy in Vietnam was that its enormous cost in lives and dollars would keep any future administration from going down that road again.
*
I was wrong. Today, I am astounded at the Obama administration's decision to escalate the equally mistaken war in Afghanistan, and as I listen to our talented young president explain why he is adding 30,000 troops -- beyond the 21,000 he had added already -- I can only think: another Vietnam. I hope I am incorrect, but history tells me otherwise.
*
We have had tens of thousands of troops in Afghanistan for several years, and we have employed an even larger number of mercenaries (or "contractors," as they're called these days). As in Vietnam, the insurgent forces are stronger than ever, and the Afghan government is as corrupt as the one we backed in Saigon.
*
Why do we send young Americans to risk life and limb on behalf of such worthless regimes? The administration says we need to fight al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. But the major al-Qaeda forces are in Pakistan. The insurgency in Afghanistan is led by the Taliban. Its target is its own government, not our government.
*
Starting in 1979, the Soviets tried to control events in Afghanistan for nearly a decade. They lost 15,000 troops, and an even larger number of soldiers were crippled or wounded. Their treasury was exhausted, and the Soviet Union collapsed. A similar fate has befallen other powers that have tried to work their will on Afghanistan's collection of mountain warlords and tribes.
*
Even if we had a good case for a war in Afghanistan, we simply cannot afford to wage it. With a $12 trillion debt and a serious economic recession, this is not a time for unnecessary wars abroad. We should bring our soldiers home before any more of them are killed or wounded -- and before our national debt explodes.
*
Obama has the capacity to be a great president; I just hope that Afghanistan will not tarnish his message of change. After half a century of Cold War and hot wars, it is time to rebuild our great and troubled land. By closing down the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, we can divert the vast sums being spent there to revitalizing our own nation. In 1972, I called on my fellow citizens to "Come home, America." Today, I commend these words to our new president.
*
Having lived through the Vietnam era, I continue to have a sickening feeling of deja vue and wonder why our civilian leaders never seem to learn the lessons of history and go on to repeat the same mistakes while relying on the promises of military commanders.
1 comment:
Our leaders never 'learn' because they are controlled by the same establishment interests. Why should Obama be any different? Just because he is African-American? Obama's talk of change was vague throughout his campaign. Now that he has been in office nearly a year we can see that there is no real change but a continuation of the same foreign policy, the same deference to the military-industrial complex but cloaked in an aura of progressivism. It's apparent that even George McGovern has been duped by Obama. Obama 'has the potential to be a great President' according to McGovern. Why? What has he done to suggest this? Even his health care 'reform' is nothing more than a remake of what we already have. Will we have a national health plan like Britain's? It's clear that we will not. It amazes me how unwilling Obama's supporters are to admit that they have voted for another establishment puppet.
Post a Comment