The analogy is simple - Vietnam sucked up a huge amount of the weaponry being handed out to revolutionary movements by the communist bloc. Millions of Chinese starved to death because Mao had to keep the Indochinese guerrillas hip deep in artillery shells and SKS rifles. The Soviets probably took a fair amount of damage to their economy because of the huge weapons-related loans to their proxies that were never paid back.
Afghanistan is fulfilling a similar role. Without Uncle Sam pulverizing the jihadists there, the quasi-NGO jihadi financiers and armorers will shift their attention to other targets. People who say that the war is taking up too much money are nuts. The military-industrial complex has spent about 5% of GDP during the War on Terror - roughly the average for the past 6 decades. It's the welfare state complex that's been killing us - it went from a low single digit % of GDP at the beginning of the 19th century to about 30% today.
...Senior Executive Service (SES) and Civil Service(GS-14/15)revolving-door, deeply-embedded careerist Marxists just agitating and doing the anti-Christ's work...Destabilizing things at any DOD-related Agency/Department on the "Home-Front".
[Dawn] Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei, lying on the periphery of the heartland of the Moslem world, appear to be islands of stability in the stormy sea that is the Moslem world. There we have seen relative stability come after wise politicianship and good governance has brought under control the various evils that afflict the other parts of the Moslem world.
Malaysia's ethnic harmony between the indigenous Malay and the Chinese and Indian minorities came after years of able leadership and affirmative actions, which brought the Malays closer to par with their Chinese and Indian counterparts. Indonesia, after years of fruitless efforts, under successive military-supported dictators, to expand its territorial limits eventually not only gave up such ambitions, but even ceded part of the territory it held and granted greater autonomy to other areas. It could then reduce the influence of the military in politics and get on with the job of exploiting its rich natural resources to usher in an era of prosperity and economic well-being for the people.
Are there lessons to be learnt from the experience of these countries? Clearly, the chief lesson is that we must have stable and able leadership which even while looking after its own interests frames policies, both domestic and foreign, to serve the domestic agenda of promoting the economic well-being of its people and eliminating the causes of ethnic and sectarian strife.
But to my mind the even more important lesson is that the administrative structure must be improved and depoliticised. We started with an administrative structure that was the envy of countries like Malaysia. It was recruited on merit. Today, with notable exceptions, posts in the bureaucracy have become gifts that the politicians dole out to their favourites or sell to the highest bidder. Today, no conscientious police officer dare arrest even a killer without checking his political connections.
To the extent that they are stable, it is because they have deviated from Arab Muslim doctrine. Indeed, the violence that Malaysia and Indonesia have seen lately is due entirely to the importing on Arab Islam into these countries.
"Depoliticizing the administrative structure" is simply not in the DNA of Middle Eastern culture.
Posted by: Frozen Al ||