Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, October 01, 2009
Steve Chapman :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Tragedies of Afghanistan
by Steve Chapman
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will Congress pass Obamacare by the end of the year?

If Shakespeare had ever written a play about Afghanistan, it would have been a tragedy, not a comedy. For the United States, Afghanistan has been one tragedy after another, with more looming ahead.

Arguing
with Idiots By Glenn Beck

In that part of the world, the only thing more dangerous than failure is success. It was America's success in helping the mujahedeen rebels defeat the Soviet Union that spawned later troubles. In the vacuum left by the departure of the Red Army, civil war broke out among competing factions, with the fanatical Taliban coming out on top.

Their theocratic regime eventually found common cause with al-Qaida after it moved from Sudan to Afghanistan. From that safe refuge, Osama bin Laden plotted and carried out attacks on American targets, but the Clinton administration and the Bush administration failed to respond effectively. The failure led to the 9/11 catastrophe.

After nearly 3,000 people were slaughtered on American soil, the United States invaded Afghanistan. Critics warned it was plunging into a quagmire, but they were proved wrong. In just two months, the Taliban were smashed, al-Qaida was on the run, and victory was ours.

It was a heady moment. In his State of the Union speech in January 2002, President Bush waxed triumphant, asserting that we had "saved a people from starvation and freed a country from brutal oppression."

But as any student of tragedy knows, it is moments of triumph that carry the greatest risk. Emboldened by our stunning victory in Afghanistan, Bush and his advisers concluded we could win just as easily and quickly in Iraq. The Pentagon figured the U.S. presence would stay no more than six months, with a spokesman saying, "The plan is to get it done as quickly as possible and get out."

Having been drawn into that blunder, the administration proceeded to make another one: shortchanging the mission in Afghanistan to avert defeat in Iraq. Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, recently told a Senate Committee, "We very badly under-resourced Afghanistan for the better part of four or five years."

The Bush administration, through hubris or incompetence, acted as though that war were not very important or already won. For the average American, it was easy to forget it was still going on. Few people ever expected that after routing our enemies in 2001, we would still be fighting eight years later -- and faring worse all the time.

But now that the war in Iraq has turned up, its longtime supporters think they have found the magic formula for Afghanistan. A big boost in troops, combined with a new strategy aimed less at killing the enemy than winning over the populace, is supposed to produce victory there just as it did in Iraq. Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Steve Chapman is a columnist and editorial writer for the Chicago Tribune.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
How to get more dead for the dollar
Consider this recipe for corruption and to prolong a war (money flow). Put a big reward on just a few leaders of the bad guys, and give all the war money only to the leaders of the good guys. Now you know why the herd of Taliban roam and multiply. Now consider that American buffalo nearly disappeared because every “dead” buffalo had a price on them, not just a few leaders. A live buffalo had no reward.
 
We've spent $732 billion in Afghanistan. A $50,000 reward put in the hands of the killer for every dead Taliban they turn in would pay for 14,640,000, annihilating them like the buffalo. Isn't that the goal?

We don't need more troops in Afghanistan, but a better lotto game for those tasked to get rid of Taliban. Stupid to only have a mega million pay out for a few top terrorist leaders. We need the killing incentive corrected to accomplish "more dead for the dollar". Putting money in the hands of the Taliban killer, not the Generals, War Corporations, and  leaders of Afghanistan.
 
Bounce this simple and proven logic (ask a buffalo) off the next "real" General fighting in Afghanistan. By real, I mean one that's not persuaded for any reason to prolong war (money flow).

a response about thew militant approach
re:
Michael in FLA is correct
Arial Bombardment without ground forces never works.

We need troops based in Afghanistan. it will take awhile, at least 5-8 years by best analysis.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

In the first Gulf War, we accomplished exactly what we wanted with just arial bombardment. Our enemy is not the Afghan people per se but a fringe element.

There is NO WAY the American public will tolerate a major ground commitment for 5-8 years...either the $ cost or the human treasure either. We also cannot win hearts and minds-- we don't begin to understand their mindset.

I have heard the crapola about we never lost a battle in Viet Nam-- but we DAMM SURE lost the war. My father (recommended for Medal Of Honor-- got Silver Star, 2 Bronze, 4 DFC's, Green Berets of Army made him a member for unbridled heroism) was in country in '66 as a FAC flying a little plane directing strikes. He also bombed Nam in B-52's later as an Airborne Commander. He said that the bombers could have made the North quit, but we peculiarly declined to hit them where it hurt enough. Caesar knew that you must destroy the will to fight.

As for the power of bombing, Albert Speer said that the single most important thing the West had going for it was the 8th Air Force... it did the most to wreck the resolve and fighting capability of the Germans.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.