Afghan Fantasy Masks Failing to Protect Our Own Borders
by Dan Ehrlich

Afghan President Hamid Karzai longs for a Bush era fantasy golden time of American military involvement in his country, while Americans wonder how we again became involved in a seemingly endless war now into its 10th year.

Karzai points to a time when US soldiers were greeted and treated as liberators from Taliban brutality. Yet, at the time of his retrospective view, which was July 2009, US Ambassador Karl Eikenberry told Karzai Americans weren’t there to become popular. Our job was to help make Karzai’s government popular.

The problem with any foreign liberation invasion is you can easily overstay your welcome, especially if you are not accomplishing your mission. And that’s basically what’s happening with the NATO war on terror. This is a war whose validity is almost on a par with the claim of Iraqi atomic weapons being aimed at western Europe.

Our rationale for war against the Taliban was they were allowing Al Qaeda to base itself in Afghanistan and were even its ally. But, as we have seen,Osama bin Laden’s gang is now based mainly on the home turf of our ally Pakistan.

As for the Taliban…we shouldn't be fighting this totally disagreeable and extreme Islamic group…a group we initially armed to fight the Soviets in the 1970s. They’re the ones we really should be dealing with to get Bin :Laden. But we won’t because we have to have a pseudo democratic leader as our puppet. Driven partly by revulsion to the treatment of Afghan women under Taliban rule, the US led NATO force is barking up the wrong tree.

Americans keep thinking they can impress their political and value systems on people who have no idea of democracy and reject western morality. Still, for awhile this plays well back home, until the body bags become so numerous in a war without end that Americans ask: Why the hell are we there?

This question is becoming louder each day. And President Obama, who while opposing the Iraq war, has long supported our Afghan involvement. This means he has to put on a braver face with each new American death in that largely desolate nation.

First, the Taliban weren’t behind 9/11…Bin Laden’s gang were…and they’re Saudis….from another one of our most favored nations. They may have been based in Afghanistan, but they didn't launch their attack on America from there.

Second, even after the Pan Am Lockerbie disaster and one previous deadly attempt on the World Trade Center, these Saudi terrorists were able to cruise into the USA more easily than illegals crossing the Mexican border. They launched their attack, after being allowed to take flying lessons here, from the USA.

Third, instead of spending billions on what will end up a fruitless war costing thousands of NATO lives, we should be investing that money in defending our porous borders…something no President has yet deemed a priority. It seems more acceptable to wage a war. Is that because they are afraid such a defense would also stop the flow of badly needed low wage illegal labor?

There will always be terrorists of some sort, if not in Afghanistan somewhere else. It should be perfectly clear by now, the first line of defense isn't over there, it's right here at home.

Fourth, rather than fighting the Taliban, which controls much of their mountainous tribal nation, we should have attempted to engage them in dialogue and offered them aid if they helped us wipe out Al Qaeda. The Taliban has no love affair with Bin Laden. They may all be Muslims, but from different nations and people.

President Karzai, fantasizing about some golden time when he felt more secure, sees our resolve slipping as we enter the 10th year of the war, as he sees our backing of his reportedly corrupt government becoming lessening. More and more the spectre of Vietnam appears in Afghanistan.

No comments:

Post a Comment

comments here: