| Submit your comments on this article |
| --Tech & Moderator Notes |
| Afghanistan -- It's Time to Go |
| 2012-02-26 |
| A Rantburg Opinion by Steve White I hate to say it. It is time to leave Afghanistan. I strongly supported George W. Bush's leadership and our entry into Afghanistan after 9/11. We had been attacked by a terrorist group that used a Taliban-ruled Afghanistan to train and plan. Al-Qaeda killed thousands of my countrymen and women. We had to go get them, and Afghanistan is where they were. George Bush, that misunderestimated man, articulated our goals for our operations in Afghanistan in late 2001 -- First, to destroy as much of al-Qaeda as we could and deny them the use of Afghanistan as a base of operations for their large-scale terror and insurgency campaigns. Second, to remove the Taliban from power as a punishment for supporting al-Qaeda. It was the right thing to do. Using air power, special forces and Marines, we cleaned out most of al-Qaeda, liberated much of Afghanistan from Taliban control, and set the stage whereby al-Qaeda could not return in any strength without our knowing it and fixing it. We were not perfect but we achieved both goals. Then we blew it by insisting on nation-building. I understand how it happened. Mr. Bush listened to the Europeans, and that's usually a mistake. It was the professional hand-wringers who invoked Colin Powell's 'Pottery Barn' rule: you break it, you own it. Supposedly it was the U.S. who 'broke' Afghanistan so we had to 'fix' it, not withstanding the facts that there had rarely ever been a functional Afghanistan, and whatever there was in the past had been broken by the Soviets and the Taliban. We tried. We brought in tens of thousands of soldiers and Marines. We brought in reconstruction advisors, military advisors, and diplomats. We worked to fix the country. Perhaps if the Pashtuns and the Pakistanis (but I repeat myself) had behaved it would have succeeded. But the ISI, supported quietly by the Saudis, could not allow us to beat the Taliban and thereby remove the Pashtun lands from their influence, and so we continue to bleed. Worse than the ISI has been our own failure to recognize, in Afghanistan today as in other countries in past generations, that 'nation building', particularly done by outsiders, generally does not work. Afghanistan is firmly rooted in the 10th Century (AD or BC is a fair question) with the thinnest veneer of 20th century life in the larger cities. The people there are more tribal than on just about any patch of land on the planet. There is no nation to build. If building a single Afghan republic within the current borders is our goal, we have already failed and will continue to fail for the next century. Having gone through our own nation-building in the Americas and Europe over the last five centuries we many times fail to understand that large swaths of Asia simply are not, and will not be for a long time, inhabited by people with a sense of national identity. Some point to a defeated, post World War II Germany and Japan as examples of successful nation building. But we did not 'build' nations there, we rebuilt them from the rubble of what were, prior to hostilities, successful nations. Germany had been a leading power in Europe. Japan had been the strongest nation in East Asia. After bombing them flat and occupying them it was a matter of removing the evil political class, re-educating the people and reconstructing the physical plant. Both Germany and Japan had a national self-identity. They were not built, they were reassembled. What's more, we had no external power in either of these countries that interfered with our reconstruction. We failed in nation-building in Vietnam in large part (besides never understanding the Vietnamese people) because the Soviet Union, China and North Vietnam never let us go forward. Today we are failing in Iraq because Iran continues to meddle, and we are failing in Afghanistan because of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Just as the price of confronting the Soviet Union over its meddling was too high to contemplate, today the price of confronting those who interfere with us is one that we will not pay. Simply watch the long dance of 'sanctions', negotiations and rhetoric with the Islamic Republic of Iran: no nation besides Israel will confront them, and the West is working to constrain the Israelis, not the Iranians. We have not been able to solve the problem of tribalism. We are not able to change Pakistan. We have not been able to persuade the ISI to leave us alone. And we won't, because of the oil, remove the House of Saud. An alternative approach would be to remove the heavy presence in Afghanistan and return to the original light footprint of late 2001. Keep Bagram airbase, and use our air power and special forces to suppress al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Make the logistics as simple as we can so that we do not have to depend on Pakistan. We could arm the Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara tribes in the north and west. We could try to split and co-opt the Pashtun tribes. All that would require a compliant central government in Kabul, and we have no evidence that Hamid Karzai or his successors would be willing to let us stay. Karzai doesn't see the Taliban as an existential threat; they're just one more local, Pashtun sub-tribe to him. Worse yet, arming the other tribes might allow them to fight each other as much or more than they fight the Taliban. The result of a 'light war' (or light kinetic action if you prefer) is simply a slower bleed on our resources and our brave military people. We could suppress the Taliban, at least for a time, but we would not solve the problem. It also rankles our own sense of how the world should be and puts us in the position of favoring one tribe over another with the resulting bloodshed on our hands. Tribal favoritism was a favored strategy of European colonial powers, perfected in places like the Congo, Rwanda, Burma and the Ivory Coast. We would simply be implementing a 21st century imperialism. Is that who we are? Most Americans would say, 'no', and they would be right. We have tried nation building. We have tried to help. We have fought with one hand tied behind our backs. None of that has worked. Pack it up and bring our people home. Keep the satellites and the drones in place. Watch the Taliban. Make it very, very clear to them that the next time they allow a terrorist group to use their land to come at the United States, there will not be a next time ever again. It is time to go. |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #36 Thank you, Steve. It had to be said. Bring the boys home. |
| Posted by: Abu Uluque 2012-02-26 22:48 |
| #35 Watch the Taliban Make it very, very clear to them that the next time they allow a terrorist group to use their land to come at the United States, there will not be a next time ever again.. Threats like that won't make a difference to them. You are assuming they are rational actors. They're JIHADIS, for goodness sake. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2012-02-26 21:30 |
| #34 If we can't take it with us, destroy it. Power stations, cell towers, water treatment, everything. After all, Mo didn't have any of that infidel shit. You wanna live like The Prophet, here's your chance, troglodytes. Also, tell the caped restauranteer and his corrupt buddies that there's no room on the plane for them. Wish 'em luck and tell them to don't even think about moving over here. I remember after 9/11 some people talked about nuking Afghanistan. I thought they were lunatics. I don't think that way anymore. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2012-02-26 20:10 |
| #33 I thank everyone for their comments. This one was hard for me to write. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2012-02-26 19:46 |
| #32 Destroy the major airfields and roads going in and out of the place and start to take visas seriously. If you travel to an Islamic nation you should have additional security. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2012-02-26 18:20 |
| #31 Current US foreign policy is simple in principle: Do that which will help get BO re-elected. The schwerpunkt is Ohio, not Afghanistan or Pakistan. |
| Posted by: Matt 2012-02-26 17:02 |
| #30 Defenseless Taliban victims admitted to Western nations will demand submission to Sharia from their benefactors. And if that isn't forthcoming they will attack and kill. Afghanistan is not Viet Nam. Southern Vietnamese boat people weren't fanatical communists. Afghan refugees would be fanatical islamofascists. Our 'ally' aka the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan is officially demanding Sharia restrictions for non-Muslims in the West. Did the South Vietnamese government demand the adoption of Marxist-Leninist laws? |
| Posted by: Spolush Slaiting3380 2012-02-26 16:05 |
| #29 #26 It's almost as if we are at war with Islam, not just "extremists", ya know? That couldn't possibly be, could it? Nearly from the get-go, our government bent over backwards about making a distinction between the good muslims and the bad muslims. It's becoming clearer and clearer that |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2012-02-26 16:04 |
| #28 Drill deep holes and plant lots of big remote control nukes. Fill holes with concrete. Inform the world publicly of what we have done and that the deadman switch is in the Pentagon. Explain that from now on they have to tiptoe. FOAD on them. |
| Posted by: Water Modem 2012-02-26 15:13 |
| #27 Perhaps Afghanistan might yet be 'fixable' Neh, genocide ain't your [USA] style. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2012-02-26 14:54 |
| #26 It's almost as if we are at war with Islam, not just "extremists", ya know? That couldn't possibly be, could it? /Sarc |
| Posted by: Frank G 2012-02-26 14:51 |
| #25 I think that was an excellent assessment of Afghanistan. I have one concern: Taliban victims; ie. defenseless women and children. Years of chaos left many widows without the ability to protect themselves from the barbarous and actually hate the Taliban. Like Viet Nam, we should offer an airlift out for those who want to flee and relocate them. Teachers and others willing to leave the rez have an opportunity to adapt to reality. Using the Northern Alliance as a base for drones, the region could also host refugee camps, letting them work out their own ethnic bigotries. Containment seems like the way to go to me. |
| Posted by: Omoluque Hapsburg8162 2012-02-26 14:42 |
| #24 How bout make the 7th century something they can aspire to again in a millenium or so? |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2012-02-26 14:12 |
| #23 I hate to say it also ... and to look at the Koran-burning and the murder of two officers (by an Afghan security officer no less) as a Walter Cronkheit moment, but there you go. Perhaps Afghanistan might yet be 'fixable', by interdicting the Talibunnies, and keeping a couple of small safe enclaves, arming and supporting the non-Pashtuns ... but not with Obama and Crew at the top. The instant apology to Karzai is the last straw. We gave it our best shot, but if the Afghans and the Paks prefer the 7th century, then so be it. |
| Posted by: Sgt. Mom 2012-02-26 13:54 |
| #22 Tuco in The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly "If you're gonna shoot, shoot! Don't talk..." |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2012-02-26 13:44 |
| #21 You can have the best Army on the planet, but if the King is a pantywaist, it makes NO difference. |
| Posted by: newc 2012-02-26 12:47 |
| #20 Obama does not represent the majority of the US. This will pass. I think. I hope. Posted by Whiskey Mike Ring me up early on the morning of 5 Nov. I will be able to confirm or deny this statement with some degree of accuracy. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2012-02-26 12:34 |
| #19 "The underlying message was 'become a peaceful, liberal democracy or we'll kill you.'" I'm getting fed up waiting for the first part (which is not likely to happen), Ricky, and more than ready for the second. :-( |
| Posted by: Barbara 2012-02-26 12:18 |
| #18 Some point to a defeated, post World War II Germany and Japan as examples of successful nation building. But we did not 'build' nations there, we rebuilt them from the rubble of what were, prior to hostilities, successful nations. Bingo again. There was also the fact that in each case, the country's executive authority was vested in guys wearing U.S. uniforms, backed by large forces of occupation troops. The underlying message was "become a peaceful, liberal democracy or we'll kill you." |
| Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) 2012-02-26 11:19 |
| #17 Oh, we'll be back. Of course it will require another smack in the face with casualties that shouldn't be. Hopefully, by that time the ruling elite who know how to screw up everything but fix nothing will have passed on, voluntarily or involuntarily. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2012-02-26 11:17 |
| #16 This ought to be in the newspapers. I'm old enough (55) to remember when the gummint lost overall popular support for Vietnam. It wasn't so much when Cronkite declared it unwinnable after we'd actually won a smashing victory in the field during Tet '68 - it was more of a slow movement toward the realization that the politicians had no intention of winning the war. At that point, your average Joe Lunchbucket (who was likely a WWII vet) said "the hell with it, if we aren't going to win, we should cut our losses and bail." |
| Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) 2012-02-26 11:13 |
| #15 I shudder to think it costs us all that we have spent and lost in Afghanistan just to kill Osama bin Laden. But we screwed it up from the very beginning. When reports came that Binny was crossing the border into Pakistan we should have pursued him and if the Pakis didn't like it we'd just have to see what they were able to do about it. Even before that, when Clinton lobbed a cruise missile into Binny's training camp after telling the Pakis so they could pass the word to Binny. Don't we have stealth bombers that could have attacked that compound without any need to tell the Pakis? Coulda, Shoulda, Woulda. But at least we learned who our real enemies are. Now can we please stop giving them money? |
| Posted by: Abu Uluque 2012-02-26 10:58 |
| #14 It's funny, I don't think of England as being European. A blind spot of mine, probably. Sounds like you don't consider yourselves European either. All good. I count as our true, few allies just those you listed. I would add a few more, but not many. France, ...France is odd. I like their troops, I despise their elites. French society is very stratified. Liberté, égalité, fraternité; lived by many, but merely mouthed by most of the elite. I understand how what Obama says sticks in your craw; I think he says it only in spite, to injure. Obama does not represent the majority of the US. This will pass. I think. I hope. |
| Posted by: Whiskey Mike 2012-02-26 09:44 |
| #13 Ramirez |
| Posted by: Beavis 2012-02-26 09:31 |
| #12 What sticks in my throat is Obama saying France is your closet ally.He hates us also. So does he hate France, Paul D. But saying the other way is an easy two fingers to you lot, whom he hates for the sake of the father who is a wholly invented figment of his imagination, though Barack, Sr. was real enough to others. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2012-02-26 09:21 |
| #11 or we could favor one faction, say the Northern Alliance which has long been pro American or at least America friendly let them have the $$ and keep the drone assets there |
| Posted by: Lord Garth 2012-02-26 08:46 |
| #10 Whiskey Mike, As a Brit i would point out that the common man in UK is alot closer to the US than the Europeans who hate us.(Cultural and history reasons) What sticks in my throat is Obama saying France is your closet ally.He hates us also. Saudi and Pakistan have undermined us in Afghanistan and every ally?in the Middle East undermined us in Iraq. People in US need to know who their True allies are(UK,Canada,Australia,NZ) not put us down just because we are not the power we used to be.Thanks to Labour and its workshy multiculture views. |
| Posted by: Paul D 2012-02-26 08:45 |
| #9 It is time to go; well past time. I have been saying this for years. I have long been of the opinion that we cannot drag these people out of their barbarism. They like it; we will not change them (NGO-think) and should not bother. I fully supported our going into Afghanistan after 9-11. I was unhappy with the nation-building efforts both there and in Iraq; naive and arrogant, wasteful of our people and our treasure. We owe them nothing, except to flatten their 'societies' whenever they constitute a threat to us. Rinse and repeat as required. Oderint dum metuant. There have been some upsides; Turkey and Pakistan were unmasked as enemies, and now Egypt has been as well (like it wasn't obvious before). So be it. Avoid future Libya-like idiocy (Syria, anyone?); involve ourselves only when we are directly threatened. Take note that the Europeans (and need I add, the Saudis?) are not our friends; they will use us to their advantage whenever they see it as beneficial to themselves, and laugh up their sleeves while we spend our lives. |
| Posted by: Whiskey Mike 2012-02-26 07:33 |
| #8 Bush went into office promising no more nation building. then he had his "read my lips" moment. Must run in the family. Remember Elphinstone. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2012-02-26 07:09 |
| #7 Well done doctor Steve. I came out of Afghanistan last month following a very frustrating 13 months of attempting to mitigate the effectiveness of the IED threat. You will find very, very few people on the ground in Afghanistan below the rank of Colonel who will agree that we are making any difference or that conditions will be better following our departure. It is simply not so. I do not "hate to say it" it is indeed time to leave Afghanistan. The effort put forth has been a collosal and tragic disaster. Wars and insurgencies are not won by announcing one's withdrawl schedule whilst permitting cross-border enemy sancuaries to flourish and levying restrictive, non-permissive Rules of Engagement (ROE) upon friendly forces. Insurgencies are not won by the introduction of culturally offensive Female Engagement Teams (FETS) who attempt to target uneducated and oppressed women for conversion to western notions of human rights and decency. Insurgencies are not won through the 'buying' of NATO's reluctant participation. Insurgencies are not won by the monitoring of regional atmospherics through mosque sermons and madrassa activity while openly denying the Islamic threat. The Taliban Senior Leadership are simply waiting us out, training their cadres, and laughing at our nauseating apologies and claims of provincial successes. At the end of the last Spring Offensive the Taliban Senior Leadership in Quetta, Pakistan issued guidance that their efforts would continue through the winter months with the targeting and assassination of Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (GIRoA) and ISAF key figures. Clearly, this is what is taking place today and with devastating effects. Yes, it is time to leave, and it is time to study strategic lessons learned in both Iraq and Afghanistan as well. We should not continue to repeat the senseless mistakes of the past. We should think very hard about future foreign military engagements and costly entanglements. Attempting to bring primitive, Islamic cultures into the 21st century is simply a bridge too far. We owe it to our fighting forces. We owe it to all Americans. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2012-02-26 05:00 |
| #6 I do believe that precipitous withdrawal is the least bad option that is also politically realistic. However we should keep in mind just how terribly bad this option is. There was a mass fatality attack on the CONUS that in itself constituted a war crime. The POTUS set an ultimatum to the state sponsors: 'Deliver the terrorists, or we will make you share in their fate!' After more than ten years of an expensive but half-hearted war effort the US withdraws, the state sponsors return to power (in all likelihood.) Lesson for potential adversaries: "A POTUS' statements concerning issues of life and death need not be taken seriously." Just as any Soviet leader rationally took into account the precedent of America's reaction to Pearl Harbor, any adversary in the future will assess the US in light of the 9/11 war and its outcome. This is very, very dangerous. |
| Posted by: Spolush Slaiting3380 2012-02-26 04:41 |
| #5 Hell, I first said this a couple years ago when the elections were stolen. Someone advocated my banning from Rantburg. Glad to see that common sense is sweeping the land. |
| Posted by: Mizzou Mafia 2012-02-26 03:09 |
| #4 And so, Obama takes the credit, unjistly, and Bush the blame. Just in time for elections, So rememver people, OBAMA DIDN'T DO IT, JUST CLAIMED IT. Another Kie. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2012-02-26 00:54 |
| #3 I figured Bush's people recognized that (it's time to go) from the very beginning, which was why they took the first opportunity to 'declare victory' and move the war to Iraq. But no, all the 'brilliant minds' insisted the Iraq War was wrong and Afghanistan was the 'good' war, so back we went to the unwinnable war. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2012-02-26 00:39 |
| #2 After posting this another mod pointed out to me that Drew M at Ace of Spades has written something similar. I wrote my piece Saturday afternoon and wasn't aware of Drew's post at the time, though I should be checking in at Ace more than I do. But I'm gratified to see that my thinking is similar to Drew's. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2012-02-26 00:30 |
| #1 It really is. Not because the enemy there is formidable, not even because we would lose, because we do not have to. The Commander of all the troops is worse than the enemy. Straight up. I rather a Soldier have to put up with fire from the front than from fire from behind from their CINC. Faster please.... Forget offensive OPS. We are stabbed in the back at home by our own petty king. FU Obama |
| Posted by: newc 2012-02-26 00:16 |
