Afghanistan / Pakistan
July 18, 2008 6 Comments
So now there is a growing murmur in the media about the renewed violence in Afghanistan and growing rumblings that the improved situation in Iraq means we should redeploy our troops to Afghanistan. I support that ideal, with one caveat: we have to go in to Pakistan.
It is my opinion that when any country is either unable or unwilling to control vast portions of its territory and that territory is used as a base for deadly attacks on U.S. soldiers, we have both the right and the obligation to ignore international borders and get the job done. Pakistan has been a lukewarm ally at best in the war on terrorism. Many U.S. and allied soldiers have died because of Pakistan’s reluctance to control their own territory. This is unacceptable.
We have more than enough clout with Pakistan’s government. Yes, most of that clout comes at the point of a sword, but that is what war is about. We must use any threats necessary to force Pakistan to allow U.S. troops to operate in their country. And this we only do as a way of helping Musharraf save face and stay in power. If he doesn’t agree, we simply ignore him and send in our troops in the way we should have done in 2001.
I hope our leadership is willing to make the tough choice to open a second front in the Afghanistan/Pakistan theater. It seems to be the only way we can win this portion of the war. It has to be done, it must be done.
lol..enter into every country that negates the US..what good has it done ?? well i guess..the american ppl should worry coz they pay the bills so let em decide !
Obama and McCain finally found something to agree on: Afghanistan is where the real war’s at! While McCain still wants to fight in Iraq some more, Obama thinks Iraq is totally last year’s war and we should just throw everything we have at Afghanistan. Regardless of what they think of Iraq, the verdict is in. Afghanistan is the war to watch!
How must Iraq feel to be yesterday’s quagmire? If only these two chaotic regions could talk…
http://www.236.com/news/2008/07/17/if_they_imd_iraq_and_afghanist_7775.php
This would’ve been a good use of combat resources, and a place more worthy of our soldiers’ honor, than Iraq. It’s a pity we have that little distraction, especially now that America’s 1+1 framework (1 major war, 1 peacekeeping op) is tapped out. Iraq was and is all about opportunity cost.
As for #1, it’s not invading that’s ineffective – sometimes it’s necessary! – it’s invading the wrong countries that’s ineffective.
I actually opposed the invasion of Afghanistan with the Taliban as our primary target from the start. We should have dumped most of our special forces on the mountains and left the Taliban to whither under air strikes.
p.c. … i agree … we should have thrown everything at afghanistan … most of it in the mountains and whatever was left to controlling whatever response the taliban had …
what a wasted opportunity …
that said, i don’t think picking up and leaving iraq and then beefing up forces in afghanistan is going to speed us to victory. there was a very interesting article in salon about the collusion of pakistani special forces with the taliban and how that has created an environment where bolstered taliban forces are now fighting the pakistani army … it’s nuts …
but still, we wasted a beautiful opportunity … and i think a lot of military leaders think so, too.
I think it was a combination of Central Command and Rumsfeld dropping the ball that contributed to the failures in the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan.
there was a very interesting article in salon about the collusion of pakistani special forces with the taliban and how that has created an environment where bolstered taliban forces are now fighting the pakistani army … it’s nuts …
I think you point out just one more reason why we should have troops on the ground in Pakistan.