It’s almost amusing to read the minutes of a meeting Gorbachev held with his top aids in 1986 to discuss how to get the hell out of Afghanistan. I say “almost” amusing because what happened in Afghanistan during that war and ever since is a staggering tragedy. Still, I wish George W. Bush had read this memo on September 12th, 2001.
Don’t you?
It seems that the default prediction of moar war by generals is 20 to 30 years. Coincidentally the duration of a military career.
Or, at least that his aids had read it.
I wish W had read anything of value, at any time. Clearly he never did.
I say “almost” amusing because what happened in Afghanistan during that war and ever since is a staggering tragedy.
Once again, it was an occupation, not a war. The same as with the US occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq.
A war has two or more armies. In an occupation only one side has an army, but the locals are resisting the occupation, sometimes with assistance from outsiders.
The Pentagon Information/Truth Ministry loves it when you go along with their “war” narrative. It connotes the idea of fighting some great force that is intent on invading and occupying U.S. land. They hate it when we call it an “occupation” and the people opposing that a “resistance”.
this, spoken 210 years earlier:
“My lords, this ruinous and ignominious situation, where we cannot act with success, nor suffer with honor, calls upon us to remonstrate in the strongest and loudest language of truth, to rescue the ear of majesty from the delusions which surround it. The desperate state of our arms abroad is in part known. No man thinks more highly of them than I do. I love and honor the English troops. I know their virtues and their valor. I know they can achieve any thing except impossibilities, and I know that the conquest of English America is an impossibility.
You cannot, I venture to say it, you cannot conquer America. Your armies in the last war effected every thing that could be effected; and what was it? It cost a numerous army, under the command of a most able general, now a noble lord in this House, a long and laborious campaign, to expel five thousand Frenchmen from French America.
My lords, you cannot conquer America. What is your present situation there? We do not know the worst; but we know that in three campaigns we have done nothing and suffered much. Besides the sufferings, perhaps total loss of the Northern force, the best-appointed army that ever took the field, commanded by Sir William Howe, has retired from the American lines. He was obliged to relinquish his attempt, and with great delay and danger to adopt a new and distant plan of operations. We shall soon know, and in any event have reason to lament, what may have happened since.
As to conquest, therefore, my lords, I repeat, it is impossible. You may swell every expense and every effort still more extravagantly; pile and accumulate every assistance you can buy or borrow; traffic and barter with every little pitiful German prince that sells and sends his subjects to the shambles of a foreign prince.
So the Russians in the end sought to make a deal with us (their enemy) to help them get out.
So in our battle against ISIS we seek help from Iran, our former enemy.
See also the Guns of August.
While Gorbachev’s Soviet Union was an invading army, and seen by the populace that way, every knowledgeable Afghan hand I know of says that is not how the Afghan’s saw the US forces – at least in the early months and years. We were seen as an army of liberation, and very large majorities were both happy to see the Taliban removed from power and happy to have the world’s superpower there to help them restore their country. There really was a window of time when much was possible. But W/Cheney blew it in every way imaginable. And then the window closed.
Yes if GWB had only read that memo. The problem is that the memo was not put into comic book style with pictures and all. Then maybe then someone on GW’s staff would of read it! Seems the whole crew were not very literate.
Most American politicians and the public at large are simply not capable of learning from history and thinking things through in a rational and learned manner. The politicians are joined at the hip with the monied interests of the profit-addicted corporate war machine and most citizens are only capable of thinking in Rambo-esque terms about anything military-related. The embrace of willful ignorance at all levels simply dooms us to continuing generations of profit-making on the dead bodies of young Americans while a very vocal minority, who largely have no skin in the game of perpetual war, gullibly and ignorantly cheer it on and insure that the state of affairs continues on in perpetuity. Rah-rah-rah….U.S.A!!!
Not sufficiently analyzed before intervention. Better than the, “Nobody could have predicted …,” excuse, but still CYA.
A simple person would have pointed out that direct intervention in a looming or actual civil war isn’t a good idea. Outcomes are unpredictable. Absent a willingness to buy the country (actually not a bad idea as butter is cheaper than guns), best to stay out.
Can’t recall the last time the US intervened in support of a progressive and legitimate government against regressive spoilsports that “wanted their country back” and were willing engage in all forms of violence to reach their goal.
“Can’t recall the last time the US intervened in support of a progressive and legitimate government against regressive spoilsports that “wanted their country back” and were willing engage in all forms of violence to reach their goal”
We probably did the right thing in Honduras, for example, by staying out of that mess.
Which time?
“Direct intervention” ranges from the most extreme, air power and boots on the ground, to the almost invisible support for a coup/regime change. Wasn’t at all invisible in the ousting of Zalaya (the progressive) which is why other Central and South American governments condemned US actions there.
The US doesn’t have to intervene when “our guy” is in power. It’s assumed that “our guy” can build the necessary repressive institutions to keep himself in power. Like the Shah.
The elements of the Honduran elite that wanted Zelaya out didn’t need American support or help. I recall that there was some pressure on the Obama administration from the left to help put Zelaya back in power. That would have been just as wrong as helping get him out.
And the US had nothing to do with the overthrow of Allende? Except info on that participation had been leaking out for decades until Colin Powell let it slip that yes we had played a role in ousting Allende.
Wait forty years for a “Powell” speak about Honduras or refuse to be willfully ignorant? Your choice. But I’m not into arguing about basic facts.
Why are you bringing up Allende?
I’m saying we didn’t try to put Zelaya back into power… and that’s a good thing. If we helped get rid of him then that’s a bad thing. The article you posted confirms that Hondurans acted to remove Zelaya. They have their own interests and motives for doing so.
We need to stop meddling in Central and S. American countries. If coups happens, let them happen without our help. I’m not interested in helping leftists or right-wingers stay in power or removing them from office.