Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

rug

(82,333 posts)
Sun Aug 19, 2012, 10:28 PM Aug 2012

Why isn’t anyone talking about Afghanistan?

Posted on Sunday, 08.19.12
By STEPHEN M. WALT

Remember the war in Afghanistan? You know: It was the “good war,” fought in response to al Qaida’s attack on 9/11 and the Taliban’s refusal to turn them in, and subsequently justified by 1) the need to prevent future terrorist “safe havens,” 2) the desire to liberate Afghan women, 3) the imperative to bring democracy and modern governance to an underdeveloped tribal society and 4) as always, the need to preserve American “credibility.”

Writing on The New Yorker’s website, reporter Dexter Filkins warns that our long and costly effort there is likely to be a failure. We’re getting out, he says, but there is little sign that we will leave behind a properly functioning Afghan state. He notes that neither President Obama nor Mitt Romney is saying much about the war in this campaign (in part because there is about an angstrom’s worth of difference in their respective positions). But he says “You can bet that, whoever the president is, he’ll be talking about it after we’re gone.”

Three points. First, it is not really news to hear that our Afghan project is failing, because the effort to impose a centralized state from the outside was probably doomed from the start. It’s possible that a focused international effort from 2002 onward would have succeeded (and especially if the geniuses in the Bush administration hadn’t taken their eye off the ball in order to invade Iraq), but the odds are against it. Plenty of people have been warning for years now that this war was going to end up a failure, which is why some of us opposed Obama’s decision to escalate the war in 2009 and called for disengagement instead.

Second, even if Filkins’ pessimism is right, it is not clear why the next president will want or will have to spend a lot of time worrying about Afghanistan. If Afghanistan were truly a vital strategic interest, it wouldn’t be all that hard to convince Americans to pony up the resources to stay. But the fact is that Afghanistan isn’t a vital interest: it’s a land-locked and impoverished country thousands of miles from our shores. The only reason that we went there in the first place is because a handful of misguided crackpots decided to hide out there, and subsequently got very lucky in staging a dramatic attack on U.S. soil. Once they were scattered and/or killed, Afghanistan reverted to being the strategic backwater it has always been. The American people understand this, yet Obama had to concoct a face-saving strategy of escalating first in order to withdraw later. If the next president — whoever it is — is smart, he’ll spend as much time worrying about Afghanistan as Carter and Reagan spent worrying about Vietnam. Which is to say, hardly any.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/08/19/2955336/why-isnt-anyone-talking-about.html

20 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why isn’t anyone talking about Afghanistan? (Original Post) rug Aug 2012 OP
Because it hurts too much MichiganVote Aug 2012 #1
tedbearly tedbear Aug 2012 #2
Because it is the issue which most perfectly reveals Bonobo Aug 2012 #3
I still send packages and postcards to soldiers and Marines in Afghanistan Skittles Aug 2012 #4
Really think you're going to change Pres. Bush's mind on this? kenny blankenship Aug 2012 #5
Bush has been out of office for nearly four years. rug Aug 2012 #6
I think you remain "President" in the name title, for life. n/t progressivebydesign Aug 2012 #7
The power to change course ends with the term. rug Aug 2012 #9
Well he must have left town very quietly! kenny blankenship Aug 2012 #12
Because President Obama and his Admin. have a timetable to get out of there. progressivebydesign Aug 2012 #8
It's been - and will remain - unstable for many moments. rug Aug 2012 #10
You don't see a contradiction there? Bonobo Aug 2012 #11
Thank you. Solly Mack Aug 2012 #14
I can't sit by and watch while people make excuses for this war. Bonobo Aug 2012 #16
In reality, the time table is conditional... Amonester Aug 2012 #15
So in reality, it is not a timetable so much as an empty promise Bonobo Aug 2012 #17
Yes. But it is a timetable which 'hopes' the conditions will 'materialize' in reality. Amonester Aug 2012 #18
It will continue to be unstable - poor emilyg Aug 2012 #13
"It's too unstable to pull out right at the moment." Hissyspit Aug 2012 #20
The fact that people do stupid shit to appear hawkish is a reality of the world we live in Hippo_Tron Aug 2012 #19

tedbear

(45 posts)
2. tedbearly
Sun Aug 19, 2012, 10:35 PM
Aug 2012

I have been wondering about how much money Cheney made through his corporation from Afghanistan and Iraq. This was a shameful way of stealing from us all and I hope Bush's staying out of the camera now is because he is ashamed of himself for allowing Cheney to rip us all off.

Bonobo

(29,257 posts)
3. Because it is the issue which most perfectly reveals
Sun Aug 19, 2012, 10:36 PM
Aug 2012

how willing people are to throw their principles out the window in the name of political expediency and being on the winning side.

Skittles

(153,212 posts)
4. I still send packages and postcards to soldiers and Marines in Afghanistan
Sun Aug 19, 2012, 10:46 PM
Aug 2012

been doing it for YEARS AND YEARS

kenny blankenship

(15,689 posts)
5. Really think you're going to change Pres. Bush's mind on this?
Sun Aug 19, 2012, 10:50 PM
Aug 2012

It's been eleven fucking years already. He has a bottomless thirst for the red red vino on tap, and doesn't care about what you might call the cost.

kenny blankenship

(15,689 posts)
12. Well he must have left town very quietly!
Sun Aug 19, 2012, 11:34 PM
Aug 2012

His tax cuts are still there, his permawar grinds on and I hear they've been taking it on the road to Yemen and far off places, the unconstitutional police state measures are all still there, the busted out bankers aren't in jail but rolling in dough, tens of millions are out of work - hell they added 3.6 million to the SS disability list just to hide 'em - shit all looks the same!

If Bush isn't still President who's the new President, then? Is he the one who told Cheney to get hairplugs and lose the glasses?

progressivebydesign

(19,458 posts)
8. Because President Obama and his Admin. have a timetable to get out of there.
Sun Aug 19, 2012, 11:19 PM
Aug 2012

Unlike the person that got us into it. He got us out of combat in Iraq, and it's too unstable to pull out right at the moment.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
10. It's been - and will remain - unstable for many moments.
Sun Aug 19, 2012, 11:29 PM
Aug 2012

If it remains unstable "at the moment" in 2014, do you advocate staying until the right moment?

Bonobo

(29,257 posts)
11. You don't see a contradiction there?
Sun Aug 19, 2012, 11:31 PM
Aug 2012

You say it is "too unstable" to leave now.

But a "timetable" means we are leaving on a fixed date rather than due to the situation on the ground.

Starting to see the contradiction or does it need to be spelled out?

In other words, we are leaving, if what Obama says is true, whether the situation is stable or not.

Which begs the question, why aren't we just leaving now?

Or how about this question: Why did we even go in in the first place? Leaving on a timetable implies either that we have given up on the goal or that the goal has been accomplished. Problems, problems, contradictions, contradictions.

BTW, the soldiers that die tomorrow, or the next day...will that be in the furthering of a specific goal or just shit outta luck that they didn't make it until the arbitrary bell rang?

Bonobo

(29,257 posts)
16. I can't sit by and watch while people make excuses for this war.
Mon Aug 20, 2012, 12:16 AM
Aug 2012

I never forgave Reagan for his wars, not Bush I or Bush II. Although I accepted that clinton's work in Bosnia was well done, I never forgave him for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children with his embargo on lifesaving food and medicine.

Neither will I forgive Obama for escalating the war in Afghanistan and creating new enemies in several other countries through his dramatic escalation of the Drone assassinations and for not vilifying Bush II for his torture and other war crimes.

Amonester

(11,541 posts)
15. In reality, the time table is conditional...
Mon Aug 20, 2012, 12:13 AM
Aug 2012

to the 'conditions' on the ground, and will probably (and wrongly) be 'extended' once it will be clear the 'goal' has not been reached.

And remember, pipelines are still 'needed' (one day or another, although it will always be 'another' until the day there won't be any oil left).

Bonobo

(29,257 posts)
17. So in reality, it is not a timetable so much as an empty promise
Mon Aug 20, 2012, 12:22 AM
Aug 2012

designed to silence anyone demanding that it end.

Amonester

(11,541 posts)
18. Yes. But it is a timetable which 'hopes' the conditions will 'materialize' in reality.
Mon Aug 20, 2012, 12:31 AM
Aug 2012

A bit like I hope to win the lottery's multi-millionaire jackpot every time I throw (minimum) money away...

It's a hell hole.

Hippo_Tron

(25,453 posts)
19. The fact that people do stupid shit to appear hawkish is a reality of the world we live in
Mon Aug 20, 2012, 12:43 AM
Aug 2012

It goes back to McCarthy and Eisenhower calling Truman weak on Communism.

I've been saying since 2009 that Obama's escalation in Afghanistan was about political calculus and nothing more. The alternative was McCain/Palin who certainly would've been no better and may have started a war with Iran. The current alternative is Romney/Ryan who will certainly be no better and may start a war in Iran.

I'm not saying that justifies Obama's actions. I'm just saying that's the current state of affairs. If anybody has a good suggestions for how to improve said state of affairs, I'm all ears.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why isn’t anyone talking ...