6eorge Will calls for withdrawal from Afghanistan


Will: Why are we still in Afghanistan?

Each call regarding whether to continue to pursue a war or not is its own animal. Will got the call in Iraq horribly wrong when he deemed it ill-advised after learning that the expected WMDs were not to be found in Iraq.

Unless the D’s snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory in Iraq–which is very possible given their soft foreign policy stance–the makeover of Iraq from a dictatorship to a democracy will pay dividends for years. Iraq has a relatively well-educated population and a wealth of natural resources. The pre-conditions for a sustainable democracy are there. To hear the D’s talk about it, you’d think that the world would be better off if the 50 million Iraqis were still under the brutal, repressive dictatorship of Saddam. They just can’t seem to make that connection.

Not so in Afghanistan. And this is where Zero™ and the D’s got it so very wrong when they claimed that the US had taken it’s eye of the ball (Afghanistan) by invading Iraq (blinded by BDS and an urge to see mistakes in all Bush decisions). The population in Afghanistan is very poorly educated. The land offers not much other than rocks and difficult-to-navigate mountains. What is so strategically important about Afghanistan itself?

Did we have to invade Afghanistan after 9/11 to deliver a punch in the nose to the area and the Taliban that supported the 9/11 terrorist training? Absolutely. No question. A failure to respond with force would have been a clear signal that terrorism pays.

But there are declining marginal returns to fighting in Afghanistan. Is Afghanistan more important today than the possible capture of nuclear weapons in Pakistan by the Taliban? Is Afghanistan more important than the emerging nuclear threat in Iran?*

Will closes with

Genius, said de Gaulle, recalling Bismarck’s decision to halt German forces short of Paris in 1870, sometimes consists of knowing when to stop. Genius is not required to recognize that in Afghanistan, when means now, before more American valor, such as Allen’s, is squandered.

Again, Will got the call wrong in Iraq. But I think he is at least asking the right question in regards to Afghanistan. Why?

*I know, N Korea is out there, too, but there are neighbors of N. Korea that need to stand up backed by our assistance. The N. Korea problem is firstly their’s.



RSS feed

4 Comments Leave a comment

Two against, one for

6eorge Jetson (Diary) Tuesday, September 1st at 8:47AM EST (link)

Frederick Kagan weighs in against

Rich Lowry weighs in against

Mark Steyn weighs in supportive

To clarify my column, I’m not advocating a total pullout. But I am wary of an Zero™ Afghan policy that is shaped more by BDS and justifying the D’s campaign rhetoric than in maximizing US interests/impact.

No one would call General MacArthur a pacifist for employing his island-hopping strategy in WWII.

 

I would like to extricate ourselves from Afghanistan...

JadedByPolitics (Diary) Tuesday, September 1st at 9:28AM EST (link)

only because I don’t believe that The Won has the back of our military. He has already said that the objective is not victory and with that attitude I don’t want our real American Hero’s dying for nothing less then VICTORY! So Will is correct in that it is time to go and let those idiots figure out their own way forward. It is interesting how if you keep people from being educated you can always control them.

Oh, Will Needn't Have Written This - Obama & The Dems Will Pull Out

IJB Tuesday, September 1st at 10:24AM EST (link)

It’s only a question of “When?” not “If?”

FTR, I think we’ll be mostly/entirely out of Afghanistan by the end of 2010, with the Taliban very likely to regain control of 80% of the nation by 2011. (Which, in turn, will further destabilize Pakistan, as it will allow bases and a theater of operations for the enemy…)

Which means, once Zer0 is voted out, we’ll just have to go back in by 2013…

 
 

DEMS' war history

tedpomeroy (Diary) Tuesday, September 1st at 2:32PM EST (link)

DEMS’ war history may call us to demand a policy described by Mr. Will.

The DEMS’ controlled the White House and Congress from 1961 to 1969. They continued to send young men into the Vietnam with an aimless strategy in order to hold off the charge of being soft on Communism.

Now President Obama who wanted to use opposition to the Iraq war has verbally committed himself to Afganistan. He did not want to be perceived as soft on terror, but he really does not care.

Like LBJ his plans are on domestic policy and the growth of the welfare state.

Our men and women in uniform may be in danger for nothing!