Afghanistan is in the news with the US undertaking still another review of the strategy and tactics needed there. Although I am a hawk on a lot of matters, I am thinking we should step back and take a look at Afghanistan.
What is our strategic interest there? Is the conflict there so important that it involves our nation's really strategic interests? In other words, is it something so important all the resources we have should should be used to accomplish the objective? Stated another way, is Afghanistan so important to us that we should expend large numbers of lives and billions or trillions of dollars to make Afghanistan "safe for democracy,"or whatever we are trying to do?
If we left Afghanistan to a fight between the factions there, would it really have any kind of effect on our national interests? How much?
Or is our objective just to make it unsafe for Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda?
My thought is that it is appropriate to have a well defined objective, and one that is based upon our important strategic interests.
I really have not seen anyone articulate a firm objective.
Our decision must be measured against some known facts. Many of the best armies in the history of the world have tried to pacify Afghanistan: Alexander the Great, the Mongols, the British in the 19th Century, and the Soviet Union in the 20th Century.
They all failed. The terrain and tribalism makes it extremely difficult to do.
The Afghanis don't like outsiders, and we have become the outsiders once NATO and the regular forces moved in.
If we try to increase our force levels and go all out to pacify the country, it will be extremely costly, and, like the other great powers of the past, we may likely fail as they did.
And we would be diverting badly needed resources from other areas, such as the Middle East, where we absolutely do have very important strategic interests, and where they may be needed soon. Think Iran.
So again, one must ask the question: Is it worth it?
I am having doubts that it would be.
3 comments:
The Russians are not prone to giving in during a conflict. Their position in Afghanistan was one of trying to put their thumb on a rogue country,that was hindering the placement of oil pipelines from Russia to the seacoast. They mistakenly thought that they would make the people of Afghanistan knuckle under their tremendous firepower. They were mistaken. They are like the Turks in Korea and other places of conflict. The Turkish soldiers were known to literally crawl all night to the enemy lines,cut a few throats (no noise)and return to their own lines.
We can see virtually the same thing in the Afghans. They don't quit,a quality that this country use to have.
I don't think our presence there deserves the terible results that we are facing. It's time to come home;physically and financialy. We have given the people something to strive for,so we haven't failed by any means.
Quite honestly our leaving would let the people decide for themselves whether to continue the path to freedom or go back to the very bad political actions of their previous leaders.
I am certainly no 'cutandrun'believer,but I think it's time to consider our position,and do what the military leaders think is right.--Goose
Does anyone remember "Killing bin Laden"? It seemed so easy at the beginning. I still can't understand why it is so difficult. Or has that goal been forgotten?
At least there was oil in Iraq!
Post a Comment