Afghanistan's Web Site: Afghanistan | Afghan Homepage
Web Site Home
Forum Home Forum Home >Afghanistan News >Afghanistan News
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - '40 Years Is Enough' in Afghanistan
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Amazon

Please Register to have your voices heard. Silence will not make the world a better place!

'40 Years Is Enough' in Afghanistan

 Post Reply Post Reply
'
Author
Message
AfghanistanNews View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group

Afghanistan's Web Site News

Joined: 01-Jan-2011
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1764
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AfghanistanNews Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: '40 Years Is Enough' in Afghanistan
    Posted: 04-Dec-2018 at 1:27pm
I must say, "Yes, yes, a thousand times yes," to Defense Secretary James Mattis, who yesterday said that "40 years is enough" of foreign powers in Afghanistan. Speaking to reporters before a meeting with India defense chief Nirmala Sitharaman, Mattis explained "it’s time for everyone to get on board, support the United Nations, support Prime Minister Modi, support President Ghani and all those who are trying to maintain peace and make for a better world here."

That's a nice sentiment, but you have to wonder if even Mattis fully appreciates just how wrong our Afghan mission has become -- and just how quickly it got that way.

We aren't a colonial power, although colonialism is exactly what we've been trying to do in Afghanistan since 2002 -- remake it in something like our image. Even worse, Afghanistan is not a colonizable country*. At least, not without wanton killing and destruction that would make Curtis LeMay blanch.

So it's been time to leave for a long time already.

And if the Taliban comes back and welcomes in ISIS or al Qaeda? Well, what of it? In 2001 we showed how to topple a government there, on the cheap, in six weeks or less -- or your next invasion is free!

And the "next invasion" wouldn't have been a joke.

If necessary, we could have replayed something like the 2001 invasion a half-dozen times by now, for a fraction of what we've spent in blood and treasure on our haphazard and doomed attempt at semi-colonization.

Best of all, we wouldn't have poured untold hundreds of billions of dollars into a corrupt and useless government -- which only incentivizes more bad behavior. Why make peace, or even govern decently, when the other guy keeps giving you money not to?
'40 Years Is Enough' in Afghanistan
A sane Afghan policy would have consisted of kicking in the door, killing a bunch of bad guys, and then skedaddling until and unless we have to do it again. Eventually, the Afghans would figure out this terrorist-harboring stuff doesn't pay. What has paid for their elites, quite handsomely, is our perennial occupation.

And let's take this thought a step further.

Inexpensive automatic weapons and copious explosives have become the great democratizer of industrial-level violence. What I mean by that is this: 21st Century tech still gives us the decisive and rapid edge at toppling foreign governments, as we saw in both Afghanistan and Iraq, but easy access to 20th Century small arms makes it nearly impossible to conquer foreign peoples. That's a huge distinction, and one seemingly lost on the Pentagon, the White House, and our endlessly chattering class.

So we need to rethink what it means to win a war, and realign our military aims accordingly.

"Winning," except perhaps in the most extreme cases, should not require completely remaking our former enemies, a la Germany and Japan after WWII. In the parts of the world where we'll be fighting our small wars -- likely in the Greater Middle East and perhaps the failed-or-failing bits of Latin America -- doing so just won't be possible. And if God forbid we ever get in a war with China? Fuggidaboudit. Occupying and remodeling a nation the size of our own and with quadruple our population just ain't gonna happen.

Here's what we can do, and what we already do well: Topple enemy governments, rescue hostages, neutralize enemy movements, provide military aid and comfort, blow up bad guys from afar, etc. In other words: The high-tech, globalized version of Imperial Rome's punitive expeditions. Get in, commit maximum violence, then get back out.

ASIDE: Some missions will require longer commitments, such as rooting out the last of ISIS. But ISIS is also a good example of the importance of not letting a terrorist group fester before we get serious about doing what needs to be done. Had Obama acted aggressively in 2013, the group would have been shut down in weeks or months, rather than years. Small amounts of violence applied early on prevents larger wars later. Just ask the French troops idly watching Nazi Germany reoccupy the Rhineland in 1936.
Imperial Rome didn't have much in the way territorial ambitions -- they did their big conquering as a republic. We're in a similar position. We conquered most of the best bits of North America early in our history, and now we are, to borrow Bismarck's phrase, a satiated power. So while there's no more land we want to take, we do have global interests to protect -- and terrorists who will kill us here if we don't kill them there first. So, like Rome, we should defend what's ours and aid our allies, but without engaging in fruitless quests to Romanize the Germans or Slavs. Or in our case, try to Americanize the Afghans or Iraqis.

So Mattis is right: It's time to get out of Afghanistan. What he's wrong about is the need to negotiate first. Negotiate what, for how long, with whom, and to what achievable end?

No, it's time to pack our things and go, without leaving so much as a goodbye note on the nightstand.

BY STEPHEN GREEN DECEMBER 4, 2018

Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
AfghanistanNews View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group

Afghanistan's Web Site News

Joined: 01-Jan-2011
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1764
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AfghanistanNews Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Dec-2018 at 2:07pm
I loved your article except for the last part. We cannot leave without a balanced government after all the sweat, blood and money. It will become another training ground for powers in the area against us. Without a goodbye note there will be no support for United Nations, Prime Minister Modi and President Ghani.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
" data-numposts="5">
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.
Abdul Raziq an Afghan Hero