Thank You, And Condolences
Tragically, per the AP, 31 special ops troops -- most, Navy SEALs from the elite unit that took out Bin Laden, were killed when their helicopter was shot down in Afghanistan. The Taliban claimed responsibility.
Yochi Dreazen writes for National Journal:
The deadly crash of a U.S. helicopter in eastern Afghanistan earlier today will fuel the growing questions about the Obama administration's handling of the long war--and the public's nagging sense, evident in recent polls, that the conflict is simply not worth its enormous human and financial cost....The rapidly rising U.S. death toll in Afghanistan--paired with a lack of discernible military progress there--is raising new questions about President Obama's war policy. During the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama accused then-President George W. Bush of shortchanging the Afghan war effort in favor of the Iraq War and promised to significantly boost U.S. troop levels if elected. Since taking office, Obama has more than tripled the number of American forces in Afghanistan, including a surge of 33,000 U.S. reinforcements last year.
Obama administration officials defended the unpopular Afghan surge by arguing it was essential to eradicating the lingering al-Qaeda presence in the country. After the killing of Osama bin Laden, by contrast, a senior administration official told reporters that that the U.S. hadn't "seen a terrorist threat emanating from Afghanistan for the past seven or eight years," seemingly undercutting the main White House justification for the war's escalation.
Brian Doherty wrote in reason in March of 2010:
Undoubtedly, Afghanistan presents fertile ground for any number of future "victories," complete with casualty figures higher for Them than for Us (and with the civilian Them somewhere in the middle).But none of this means that the end goal of establishing internal security, crippling the insurgency, and guarranteeing that no one will ever plot wickedness against the U.S. from the Afghanistan area will be reached, or could be reached, minus an eternal American occupation.
Domestic and foreign policy foolishness dovetail in Afghanistan. Among all the other dubious things we are trying to accomplish in this tribally-torn land--whose younger generation has known pretty much nothing but internecine strife--is the elimination of poppy and opium production, which as much as 35 percent of the country is likely involved in. We'll probably never learn just how much peace and prosperity we could bring to this troubled land simply by letting them grow that which the world seems to most want from them. How much peace and prosperity we can bring with 100,000 troops, we will alas find out.
Perhaps not even their finest hour, but only one of their most recent:
Highly recommend you read this article.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at August 7, 2011 5:11 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/08/07/thank_you_and_c.html#comment-2405295">comment from Crid [CridComment at gmail]Terrific article, Crid.
Amy Alkon
at August 7, 2011 6:38 AM
Thanks... I'm glad I wrote it.
Y'know, passages like the one above, and this:
...will be something for us to keep in mind. We're apparently delivering a lot of death to people from dark corners of the backyard at midnight.
Note also the connections between military and intelligence described in the article. All those illiterate villagers around the world who moan that the CIA is responsible for the broken refrigerator in the community shelter house aren't baselessly paranoid.
Please remember this! Obama is a Democrat. A Democrat, Democrat, Democrat. He's a member in good standing of the Democratic Party here in the United States.
Everybody got that?
It wasn't the evil Republican George W. Bush, or even Karl Rove, who taught the little children how to hate. We're on a violent planet, and our government is probably not handling that happenstance better than it handles any other.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at August 7, 2011 7:29 AM
Excellent article...
Eric at August 7, 2011 8:51 AM
Sigh... I still believe in the general neocon philosophy, but unlike some neocons, I don't accept as a universal truth that everyone in the world desires, or is ready, to live in the modern world. I'm beginning to think that some sort of partition will be necessary, where we gather up everyone that still believes in Dark Ages barbarism, dump them all in some part of the world, completely strip that area of technology, and then close it off from the rest of the world. Unfortunately, (1) this will almost certainly involve WMDs, and (2) no one will believe that we're serious about it until we make an example out of somebody. I just don't see any way around it.
Trying to modernize Afghanistan is just not going to work. I accept that. Now what? If we leave, it will take al-Q about five minutes to reestablish its terrorist camps there. It has to be sealed off. Unfortunately, we can't do it alone, and the rest of the Western world either doesn't take the threat seriously (e.g., Spain, Germany, and to an extent Great Britian) or they are actually interested in using the terrorists to wage a proxy war against us (France, Russia).
Plus, our current economic situation makes it imperative to cut federal spending, and everything has to be on the table, including defense. In order to not wind up with a Carter-like hollow army, we have to RIF some troops and some of the people who make it possible for them to maintain their presence in a foreign engagement. Which obviously means we can't maintain a lot of foreign engagements. And, I'm seeing in the poll data that there is little popular support for such things now. If I'm a political leader, even though I may be a neocon myself, I have to accept that currently a huge majority of the public disagrees with me, and it is my job to represent them.
The only answer, under the present circumstances, is a form of isolationism. To avoid complete isolationism, it will be necessary to simplify international relations and implement tight control of the border. Drop out of NATO and other over-arching defense alliances, which are no longer serving their intended purpose, and close our bases in western Europe. Replace it with a network of ad hoc relationship with countries that are firmly committed to Western civilization. Drop out of the WTO, which isn't doing us much good anyway, and replace it with a network of ad hoc free trade relationships. For other countries, tariff the hell out of their products. Keep trade moving to the extent that it's possible while maintaining border security.
Cousin Dave at August 7, 2011 9:30 AM
More senseless deaths in a senseless war.
Joe at August 7, 2011 1:07 PM
Not a senseless war, only prosecuted by morons. Fight it the way they do, hit hard, and run, keep the pricks guessing. Forget this nation building crap
ronc at August 7, 2011 4:29 PM
Why fight at all if not to encourage national, civilized coherence? Are we there just because we enjoy killing? (And, this weekend, being killed?)
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at August 7, 2011 4:54 PM
Why fight at all if not to encourage national, civilized coherence?-crid
This kind of stupidity is why the war in afganistan lasted more than a week.
The point of war is to fuck you enemies up. Seriously crid, if a guy walked up and shot your sister in the face are you going to just bitch slap him a couple of times and then give him a few thosand doallrs out of your bank account after making him say he promises not to shoot any more of your familly members?
Becuase that seems to be how the last couple of administrations think the war should be handeled
lujlp at August 7, 2011 9:19 PM
Is it a coincidence that it was the B.L. team???
biff at August 8, 2011 1:13 PM
Exactly. But, you shouldn't trust what the media tells you about the military ... or much else these days?
Jess at August 8, 2011 3:26 PM
"Is it a coincidence that it was the B.L. team???"
I'm guessing not. I think they were set up. An "informer" slipped them some bad intel, knowing that they'd run on contact, and they were ambushed.
Cousin Dave at August 8, 2011 7:26 PM
Leave a comment