Monday, February 9, 2009


Two articles on Afghanistan ....
Grim Appraisal in Afghanistan on

Blog entry that contains links to several articles on Afghanistan. The main 'story' is that Gen. Petreus is mounting a pre-emptive strike against ongoing 'strategy' reviews and declaring that Afghanistan is in a 'downward spiral', and that of course the answer is that we need to send more troops and kill more people.

Of course, the main question is .... what on earth are we fighting in Afghanistan for? How is this is the strategic interests of the American people?

A quick review. We supposedly went to Afghanistan because Bin Laden had camps there. Supposedly, the only reason we attacked the Taliban was because they were sheltering Al-Qaida. Well, couldn't we have just left afterwards? Let them know that if they dare to let Bin Laden back, then we'll come back and blow up more stuff? Why on earth are we still there some 8 years later? How is spending billions of dollars, getting young Americans killed, and killing many (700 is the estimate for last year) civilians who dare to do things like hold a wedding party in their home village, doing anything to improve life for Americans?

It makes much less sense for us to be in Afghanistan than it ever did to be in Iraq. And it makes zero sense for us to send MORE troops. The only reason I can see for it is that the Afghan war 'polled' well so Obama and the Democrats seized on it to try to pretend they they can be as viscious and unprinicipled killers as the Republicans even though the Democrats thought we should (slowly) get out of Iraq and (slowly) close Gitmo.

Anti-war lawmakers worry over plan for Afghanistan from the AP

"WASHINGTON – After campaigning on the promise to end one war, President Barack Obama is preparing to escalate another.

Obama's dual stance on the two wars is not lost on congressional Democrats, many of whom also ran on anti-war platforms. In coming weeks, they expect to have to consider tens of billions of dollars needed for combat, including a major buildup of troops in Afghanistan."

Of course, knowing the Democrats, this will amount to just a few speeches and a few symbolic 'No' votes. They'd never do anything real, like refuse to support the House leadership. I'm not sure of the size of the 'anti-war' caucus in this Congress, but I think if they left the Democratic Party then the Democrat's majority in the House would be in question. But, they'd never do anything like that. They'll just make a few statements, cast the symbolic 'no' votes, then let the money and the troops flow to Afghanistan ... and let the body bags start to come home in greater numbers.

No comments: