Sixty-five members (including five Republicans) of the House of Representatives think we should get the hell out of Afghanistan. I would have anguished over this vote if I were a member of Congress. Both my heart and my head say that we are not going to accomplish anything there worth the cost and the lives lost. I think that is why I ultimately would have joined these folks. But, as a member of Congress I would have availed myself of the best intelligence briefings I could get before making a final decision.
About The Author
BooMan
Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.
17 Comments
Recent Posts
- Day 14: Louisiana Senator Approvingly Compares Trump to Stalin
- Day 13: Elon Musk Flexes His Muscles
- Day 12: While Elon Musk Takes Over, We Podcast With Driftglass and Blue Gal
- Day 11: Harm of Fascist Regime’s Foreign Aid Freeze Comes Into View
- Day 10: The Fascist Regime Blames a Plane Crash on Nonwhite People
we need to be gone. no need to spend 1 million dollars per soldier over there. we don’t have the money.
You are right. You are not going to accomplish anything that is worth the cost to Afghans and the Afghan lives lost.
And what could you accomplish that could possibly be worth a single life, Afghan OR American?
“But, as a member of Congress I would have availed myself of the best intelligence briefings I could get before making a final decision.”
It`s almost ten years too late for that, no.
When all the troops are out of Iraq & Afghanistan, & back here, don`t you think they`ll be a little PO`d, that there`s nothing for them here, just as everybody else.
I still have my Tshirts with a Hammer & Sickle over the map of Afghanistan, & the words “FREE AFGHANISTAN” on it.
From 1979 to 1989, that war lasted.
I think it should be enough for the US also.
Hmmmn, I think I just got an idea for a t shirt.
It will read “FREE AFGHANISTAN”, & as my threadbare one, it will mean that I want a free Afghanistan, free from foreign occupiers, not, “go” free Afghanistan with bombs & bullets.
And I don`t want to hear, “What about the ‘wimmens'”.
Except that the troops will never all be out of Iraq, at least not in our lifetime.
And as for the wimmens, for sure they are worse off in Iraq than before, and word is that on the whole they are worse off in Afghanistan. But then women and children are always be greatest victims of armed conflict.
I don’t think it’s too late to examine all the considerations related to our presence on Afghanistan. I have an open mind, even if I am very highly skeptical. And I do not think our leaving Afghanistan would in any way bring the people there freedom. It would bring them as much or more misery as our staying there. It’s just that I don’t think we can stay there forever and I don’t think we can change the Karzai government into something worth our sacrifice.
I`m talking about freedom from occupiers.
Leave them to their own destiny.
They will do much better than with the one being forced on them.
Actually, there is counterevidence for that. Strong counterevidence. Namely, the entire period between 1989-2001. That was an unremitting nightmare for Afghans. Just devastating.
And I wonder why.
Here`s a first couple of paragraphs & a link to why I might misread your comment.
”
Report Navigation
Background and History of Afghanistan:
United States Policy in Afghanistan (1989-2001)
The United States policy towards Afghanistan has taken several distinct phases in the last two decades. Throughout the 1980’s when Afghan Mujaheen fought the Soviet army, the United States government was heavily involved in Afghanistan affairs. The CIA, through the Pakistani ISI and military intelligence, funneled billions of dollars in economics and military aid to the Afghan Mujahedeen. Among the chief beneficiaries was the Hezb-e Islamic force, headed by Gulbeddin Hekmatyar and responsible for some of worst atrocities of the civil war. Despite the fact that the U.S. was clearly aware of extensive human rights violations by factions it aided, there is no evidence that any action was taken by the U.S. to prohibit Pakistan from distributing aid to the worst of the resistance forces or to criticize the Pakistani ISI for participating in abuses.
After the complete withdrawal of Soviet army from Afghan soil and the subsequent collapse of the Soviet Empire, thus end of the Cold War, the United States policy towards Afghanistan faded away and Washington’s support for the insurgents ended. Suddenly, the entire international community walked away from Afghanistan and without a transitional government, Kabul fell on the hands of seven loosely united and heavily armed warring factions and their regional supporters. In an interview with CNN, Robert Gate, then CIA director said, “Afghanistan was a battle field between the United States and the Soviet Union, now that the battle is ended, we have other agendas and other countries in mind and Afghanistan is not one of them.” The United States ignored Afghanistan for a decade allowing its regional allies, namely Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, to take advantage of the political vacuum created by the US retreat. Regional observers believe that the US strategic absence between 1992-1994 allowed the regional powers to support the competing warlords thereby intensifying the civil war.
Between 1994-1996, the U.S. supported the Taliban politically through its allies, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, for two reasons. The group’s initial professed intention to clean up the drug trade was of interest, as was its anti-Iran stance. Perhaps most importantly, the Taliban appeared to be the faction most likely to provide security for an oil and gas pipeline project proposed by the U.S. Petroleum Company UNOCAL. UNOCAL officials applauded the fall of Kabul to the Taliban and expressed their eagerness to do business with the regime. Despite evidence of reported human rights abuses such as after the capture of Herat in 1995, Taliban authorities threw out thousands of girls and women from school and workforce. The United States not only remained silent, but also continued its support by allowing Pakistan and Saudi to back up Taliban in their conquest to capture Kabul.
http://www.globalwatchgroup.org/projects/afghanBackground11.html
Yes, it was horrible during that time, but not because the US abandoned the Afghans, they left was because they couldn`t get a pipeline.
When the next opportunity became available, (19 Saudis attacking the US) the US went right back.
It was never ever for the people of Afghanistan. The US has been funding turmoil around the globe for a long time, but only when it can benefit from the turmoil it itself creates.
Funny that the word “Turmoil” ends with OIL.
I`ve been reading Global Watch, whenever I need to get another perspective on things. I`ve linked to them a few times in the past 3/4 years, for all that that matters.
It’s a lot more complicated than that. The UNOCAL theory has been vastly overblown. Our overriding policy was neglect and indifference. There’s no evidence of a concerted policy in favor of the Taliban. IN fact, the Clinton administration did find time to complain about the Taliban’s human rights abuses. And he dropped cruise missiles on them. The records are clear that we didn’t even know the players in their government.
My rep voted for it. One little bright light in a sea of darkness.
The media is making Patrick Kennedy’s point by showing only the end of his rant, out of context. Here’s his full statement re the Afghanistan war. I agree!!
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/rep-patrick-kennedy-rants-afghanistan-war-10066123
(sorry – couldn’t embed this ABC video clip)
Re withdrawing from Afghanistan, rarely do we find economics and morality so fully in agreement. Only profound stupidity would argue against getting out. Guess what? We’re probably there for a century or until the Empire goes broke.
I still have memories of the Taliban years, seeing videos of Taliban religious police beating women on the streets of Kabul, if they appeared out of a burka, or for some other slight religious infraction. And of course the Taliban also hosted Al Qaeda. If the Taliban were to regain control again of Afganistan, no doubt we would come back.
So the opinion I have is that before withdrawal, the central government must have control of the country and prevent a civil war that might lead to the retakeover of the country by the Taliban. Unfortunately, the Bush administration’s ignorance of Afganistan over seven years permitted the Taliban to resurge stronger than it previously was.
Yeah, this is where I am as well.
That’s where I want to be, but I have a real problem believing we can do that in a reasonable time at an acceptable cost, if at all, at any realistic price. That’s why I want to see real analysis from our intelligence agencies, not some b.s. talking points.
A real analysis from “our” intelligence agencies? Really? Like the ones on Cuba, Iraq, the Soviet Union, Granada, Afghanistan, Vietnam, you mean? But I take your point — It’s always pleasant to witness something that’s never happened before.
It’s always agonizing trying to wiggle out of the shitpile of our own making, because there are never any exits without long corridors of razor wire. Even the Reps had pretended to learn their lessons about “nation building”, but Sept 11 was too tasty an excuse for all the bigfoot patriots to respond in exactly the worst way. With predictable results. Tragedy in its real sense is always about stupidity.