Marine: I Could Justify Fighting In Afghanistan -- Until Boston Bombing
Marine sergeant Thomas Gibbons-Neff writes in the WaPo:
I deployed to Afghanistan believing my presence in that country would help stop attacks such as Boston's from happening. But instead, my war has spilled over, striking the city where my 22-year-old brother goes to school and where my mom, until recently, felt perfectly safe eating lunch outdoors.The Tsarnaev brothers aren't the first alleged terrorists to cite U.S. military intervention in other countries as a reason for targeting civilians, and they won't be the last. Despite our best efforts and valor, I wonder, have America's wars made the homeland less safe? Sure, we've killed and captured thousands of radicals who wanted to harm Americans. But in doing so, have we created more?
It wasn't always easy to justify serving in a war that has devolved from its initial aim of ousting the Taliban and al-Qaeda to a nation-building effort that appeared to have come 10 years too late. The conflict has dragged on for more than a decade, becoming increasingly unpopular after years of mixed results and no clear definition of victory. The counterinsurgency mantra of "clear-hold-build" echoed in our ears as we fought an elusive enemy and slowly pushed them out of the city centers. Day by day, we measured victory by the number of wells we helped build and the time that passed without a casualty.
Some of my best friends came home in flag-draped coffins, and no one ever convincingly explained to me why and what for. On a recent winter afternoon, after Afghan President Hamid Karzai delivered an upbeat speech at Georgetown on the future of Afghanistan, I had the chance to ask him what the sacrifice of my brothers-in-arms meant to him and his countrymen.
The answer I received was a diatribe. Karzai cited Sept. 11, 2001, and America's global war on terror but never directly answered my question. I would have liked a "thank you" or a sentence with "greatly appreciated" in it. But there was not a hint of gratitude in his response.
Karzi walks a very fine line in Afghanistan. That government is inherently unstable.
For this Marine to expect gratitude in public to a country who is now pulling out quickly and leaving him vulnerable to every splinter group inside his country is asking a lot. The writer of this article is almost as nieve as the terrorists.
If the US had never gone over there, Israel would be the problem and our support for Israel would be the flash point.
Isab at May 1, 2013 11:09 PM
Ummmmm... I missed part. Of this, here.
What does the Afghanistan war have to do with the Boston Marathon?
Eh?
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 2, 2013 2:02 AM
I think it is a bit more complicated than that
Nicolek at May 2, 2013 2:14 AM
I wonder, have America's wars made the homeland less safe?
Would seem to imply that terrorists are more apt to try to kill us (i.e. in Boston) because of our troops killing people in other countries.
I would tend to agree with this supposition.
After all, how would we feel if the Chinese army was to occupy say Los Angeles, randomly blowing up peoples houses and shooting them?
DrCos at May 2, 2013 3:36 AM
I'm with Isab on this, if it weren't for one excuse the terrorists would come up with another excuse - and Israel would most likely be it.
Just what Muslim country was the US invading back in 1993 when they first bombed the WTC? Or was it US support of the only functioning democracy (Israel) in the part of the world the reason?
Look at all the foreign aid that has gone to the Middle East and neighboring areas - and they still hate us!
There is really no "pleasing" many Muslims until we are all dead (or in the very least submissive).
Charles at May 2, 2013 5:07 AM
Crid:
Cause the guys who planted the bombs kinda said so. Well, someone said they said so.
That's good enough for me!
(Heck, Osama was still pissed off about Andalusia, let's get busy on fixing that insult to Islam, and we'll be safer!)
Unix-Jedi at May 2, 2013 5:09 AM
There is always an excuse. We left Afghanistan after they kicked the Russians out, so the Taliban and 9/11 are our fault. We won't leave Afghanistan, so Boston is our fault. Sure. Whatever.
There is something about the CIA delivering bags of cash to Karzai that doesn't sit right with me. If my company did it, we would be violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Why is it OK for my government?
The Romans stopped having trouble with Carthage, but it was tough on the Carthagenians. We don't have it in us to end this, so it's going to continue. Semper Fi, Marine.
MarkD at May 2, 2013 6:08 AM
We don't have it in us to end this, so it's going to continue. Semper Fi, Marine.
I believe you hit the nail on our heads. Shinto was a major contributor to the imperial fanaticism, until Macarthur disestablished it. There was no "it's a beautiful religion, the religion of peace", and other drivel. Unless that is done, islam will be the state religion, just like shinto in Japan, and with it all solutions are at most untenable.
Stinky the Clown at May 2, 2013 6:18 AM
I understand some of the Marines' concerns, but I don't buy the "hydra" theory of eliminating extremism, the one that says that we create extremists by fighting back against them. If that were true, surrender would be the only answer. Europe tried that throughout the '70s and '80s, and it didn't help.
Cousin Dave at May 2, 2013 6:49 AM
I think it's a little more complicated than either Cousin Dave or my fellow Marine believe. The "hydra" theory has some truth to it, but it also isn't the only way insurgents are created.
What this Marine may be saying, or trying to say, is that what he and the rest of the US military have been doing for the last 10+ years has not, despite a powerful propaganda effort to the contrary, done a damn thing to make Americans safer. (Realistically, terrorists aren't that great a threat to Americans anyway, and they certainly aren't an existential threat to America; that's come from our own overreaction. But that's a different rant.) We have not been "defeating them over there before they can come and attack us over here" and it would take a serious lack of critical thinking skills to believe that was even possible. The generals and politicians who babble that BS don't believe it. This poor Marine is just now coming to realize it.
Grey Ghost at May 2, 2013 7:09 AM
"But in doing so, have we created more?"
In a word, yes.
"If the US had never gone over there, Israel would be the problem and our support for Israel would be the flash point."
Not really. It isn't so much the support, as the type.
wtf at May 2, 2013 7:19 AM
Sure, we've killed and captured thousands of radicals who wanted to harm Americans. But in doing so, have we created more?
The only solution, Marine, is to surrender and convert to Islam.
But guess what? you would then be duty bound to carry out jihad against the infidel, the apostate, and the Jew. Ready to invade Israel? maybe take on the mad mullah's in Iran? maybe flatten the Kurds? [*]
On the plus side, all the ones we've sent to their 72 virgins are no longer a threat to anyone.
[*] depending on who you ask: Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds can all be considered apostates since they disagree on how to practice The One True Islam.
I R A Darth Aggie at May 2, 2013 8:53 AM
> In a word, yes.
You're not very good with words.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 2, 2013 11:32 AM
It isn't so much the support, as the type.
We should only give Israel token, ineffective support.
dee nile at May 2, 2013 12:08 PM
"You're not very good with words."
And you have an itsy bitsy teeny tiny penis. It's not my fault. Get over it.
wtf at May 2, 2013 2:37 PM
You're just upset because all the blue penises to your south are carrying the burden of the defense of your very feminine national borders, thus discrediting any thoughts you might share about deadly force and international relations.
Not a problem!
Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at May 2, 2013 2:44 PM
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=484873121583621&set=a.207256949345241.51931.204152432989026&type=1&theater
wtf at May 2, 2013 7:33 PM
Crid,
What is your solution to the Moozlims problem?
Jim P. at May 2, 2013 7:44 PM
His solution is to ignore it while bitching at those who do propose solutions
lujlp at May 3, 2013 2:35 PM
> What is your solution to the Moozlims problem?
First, I ignore the infantile terrors and paranoiac whinings of small-minded people who don't know how to read.
Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at May 3, 2013 4:18 PM
When he starts callin people infantile, it's cuz it's all he's got.
Insecure, small minded people frequently tend to accuse others of their greatest faults, as sort of a deflection technique.
wtf at May 4, 2013 6:59 AM
Dear BunBun, the United States really does patrol its own borders. And yours. That's real, and it says meaningful things about your nation's understanding of violent force. No deflection is necessary; that's who you are.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 6, 2013 4:29 PM
Notice how we don't usually get attacked? At least in our own country? And that when we do, we manage to stop them BEFORE they do any damage?
wtf at May 7, 2013 5:57 PM
Leave a comment