Monday, November 2, 2009

Goodbye Afghanistan

Sometime soon President Obama is going to tell us what he intends to do about Afghanistan; in particular, whether he intends to commit additional U.S. troops to the cause of defeating the Taliban and flushing al qaeda from the country.

I have a lot of sympathy for the difficulty of the decision since he probably has a hundred times as much information as me, and it has taken me many months to come to my own conclusion about the right course of action. I’m not going to get into them here, but it is actually pretty easy to make a case for why we should continue fighting there, but in my mind, the case for disengaging is even stronger.

The arguments most often offered for leaving Afghanistan focus on the cost side of the cost/benefit equation, and there is no question that the cost of being there is very high. We’ve already lost over 900 men and women, and the pace of our loss is accelerating rapidly. It is unbearably sad to read their names, ages, and home towns each morning in the newspaper.
On top of this ultimate sacrifice, the country is draining the treasury of something like $67 billion per year at the current pace, which would certainly rise as additional troops are committed. Imagine how many bridges that money could repair here at home. You, no doubt, have your own wish list of projects better suited for the U.S. taxpayers’ money – or maybe we could just pay the minimum on the national MasterCard debt one of these months.

The list of negatives is long: we’re propping up a government so corrupt that the only credible alternative candidate decided to give up rather than go through another sham election even though it was the final run-off for the presidency. We all know the history of defeats suffered by global powers that have sought to conquer this vast and forbidding country. And the longer and more visibly we occupy the land of Allah, the more effectively we confirm the argument made by our enemies that we are the 21st century Knights of the Templar come to reclaim Jerusalem. Every soldier we send and every Afghan we kill only serves to recruit more Muslims to fight against us. Twas ever thus.

But ultimately it is the lack of substance on the benefit side of the equation that persuades me that it is time to exit Afghanistan. What exactly do we “win” if we win? The chief reason offered for fighting is the need to prevent al qaeda from having a safe haven there, but the core power of that organization is their ability to operate across borders, behind borders, and without borders. Most of the planning for 9/11 took place in Germany. The pilots trained in the United States. If we drive them from Afghanistan they will regroup in Pakistan, Yemen, the jungles of Indonesia, or the burned out shells of houses in Detroit.

We will be fighting these people for decades no matter what we do. We need a strategy and tactics appropriate to the challenge. Better intelligence, more and better drones, targeted humanitarian aid, and a better class of friends will serve us better than tens of thousands of soldiers bogged down in a hostel land for God knows how long.

12 comments:

The Other DBlank said...

If the President chooses to take a different course of action than the advise of his military commanders, then we should pull out.

Then we should use that money to enforce our borders and keep the terrorists out!

Kaz said...

"Where empires turn into sand." Moody Blues

Warrenout said...

Yo I agree with ODB.Except, I also think somehow we are being used as a pawn in the big "H" trade. We should learn the lesson, and in the future bomb any terrorist camps when we have the chance. And then tell the UN and all the other self rightous haters of America to scrub their nuts with a wire brush.We still can't explain to 58,000 families what their sons and daughters died for in Viet Nam not sure there is much difference here.

Unknown said...

Problem is Obama can't win. Your argument is solid. On the other hand if he pulls out and terrorists attack US then the Right will say "we kept the country safe for 6 years and then you undermined our efforts in Gitmo and Afghanistan which has lead to these attacks". I guess the answer is to start to withdraw and replace US troops with UN peacekeeping force.

Unknown said...

Why stay and play their game? "When they expect you come come by the mountain, come by the sea."

If you are swimming with leaches, get out of the water.

Spend the money on bounties. Believe in capitalism!

And don't lose sight on who got us into the Middle East. Do we want any more advise from these same pie holes?

AY said...

I totally agree with you, DB.

Challenging the argument that it's necessary to avoid an increased risk of new terrorist attacks, our myopic focus on Afghanistan and Iraq only increases the likelihood of an attack. Our level of military involvement makes it more likely that terrorist organizations will take advantage of the opportunity to plan and train elsewhere for the next big attack. (Queens/Colorado based Afghanis looking to blow up the NYC subways!).

barb-wire said...

I think he was waiting to announce after the election tomorrow. Someone said "It is impossible to win a war in Afghanistan." It was a Russian...

Unknown said...

Keeping a low profile in the region should take the air out of the tires for recruitment of violent opponents. Sure, there will be setbacks in terms of villages falling back into Taliban control and worldwide PR that the big, lumbering US didn't have what it took to prevail. However, as is said, give a fool enough rope and he will hang himself. The Taliban are their own worse enemy. Unless you are one of them, you wouldn't want to live under their control. The worst will be attrocities and sense of betrayal and distrust for dropping back and ceding territory. That said, it will put the Karzai regime in full light. They will get their just desserts without America as bodyguards. Future leaders will be put on notice that the game is changing with the US and military support. If the government falls, We can work with the rest of the world to get back in, having now identified who the Taliban are by their own overt actions, and clean out the woodshed.

Withdrawal is difficult. The hardest part might be winning the support of Afghanis in the future.

Gaga said...

If he decides to go against the Joint Chiefs' he'l be assasinated in Dallas on his next trip there. Oliver Stone already has the film rights.
Keep it simple.Time to stop living in fear & hate. Stop killing , start healing.

kgwhit said...

From the cynical eye of a former Marine, I say get the hell out. To have our troops sitting out in remote areas waiting to be attacked is the same lunacy we practiced in Vietnam.
We didn't go in to replace the Taliban we went in to root out Al Qaeda's sanctuaries. For that I agree with W, "Mission Accomplished". They are now spread out to other parts of the globe.
A former Pentagon correspondent told me that we have done more to diminish Al Qaeda through stealth operations than with our boots on the ground fighting.
Gradually withdraw and continue to covertly go after Al Qaeda.
It isn’t making the US any safer staying there.

Birdman said...

Well reasoned Dennis. It's infuriating to hear these right wing chicken hawks talk about "victory" and "winning" while at the same time not saying what actually constitutes victory. The squandering of blood and treasure in that part of the world is too sad and frustrating for words. We can only hope that Obama listens to Biden and leaves this 9th century country to tribes and warlords it so richly deserves.

Oh, and Kgwhit, there is no such thing as a former Marine.

kgwhit said...

Birdman that is a good point. I need to get a bumper sticker I saw recently.

Not as Mean
Not as Lean
but still a Marine

I have pretty much gained a pound for every year I've been out.