Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

The End of the World

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on Thu, 08/21/2008 - 5:57pm
Departments: 
Department of War
Thread: 
Homeland Insecurity

I linked this earlier in a comment, but for those who missed it, suicide bombers killed 60 people in Pakistan. Along those same lines, the Pentagon will be sending 12-15,000 more troops to Afghanistan.

The very serious people of both parties seem to have decided that to make up for the Iraq fiasco, we will double down in Afghanistan so we can win the "good" war against al Qaeda. This is not a McCain v. Obama thing since both seem to think sending more troops to Afghanistan and threatening Pakistan is fantastic foreign policy.

I don't mean to be a downer, but what exactly is our plan in Afghanistan? I'm all for fighting al Qaeda where it makes sense, but didn't we kind of screw the pooch when we chose to de-emphasize that war to go into Iraq. While nation building is a tricky business, there were arguably things we could've done in Afghanistan in 2002-03 to stabilize the place, but we missed that window. The Taliban and al Qaeda have had 5-6 years to build their bases in Pakistan and fighting Pakistan with its nukes is a helluva lot different than fighting Afghanistan (which hasn't exactly gone well).

I know it's considered bad form to ask our leaders what the PLAN is for a war, but other than killing more people and getting more of our people killed, what's the end-game plan for Afghanistan? Because while everyone seems to agree we must do something, I have yet to hear how what we're planning to do will actually solve the problem. And without some sort of exit strategy, I'm going to have to agree with the odd couple Chris Floyd and Pat Buchanan and say it sounds an awful lot like Vietnam, fighting off guerilla warriors being resupplied by a neighbor.

0
No votes yet

Comments

Submitted by jawbone on

difficult it will be to get supplies to current troops, much less the 400,000 actually needed to effect change in the Afghanistan situation.

Earlier post pointed out that the Taliban/Al Q/?? are systematically attacking the supply trucks on the new road we built to make deliveries easier (we told the natives it was to enhance commerce, of course). The supply route, from Karachi, is much longer than from Kuwait to our bases in Iraq, and over much rougher terrain, and now facing much tougher attacks than previously. (Check out the comments and their links.)

BushCo, egging on NATO leaders to do the same, is working overtime to piss off Russia, which provides supply access to NATO troops from the north through Russian territory. Does NATO really want to freeze activites with Russia--and lose access? Or do they think they can keep poking the bear and not get an angry reponse?

Too brilliant, this foreign policy.

And both Obama and McCain, along with loads of Democrats who want to prove their military cred and cojones, are way too eager to make Afghanistan the next Good War. Do they fully understand what they're getting into?

Sigh.

Oops! Wrong post for second link, but they're all good.