Afghan Options
Is it too cynical to see this as McChrystal's "Petraeus Moment"? Just give him 40,000 more young Americans and another $60 billion a year or so, and he'll succeed - in making himself a viable contender for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016.
The main reason to be in Afghanistan, it seems to me, is to deny terrorists intent on attacking the US and its allies a comfortable base of operations. But we need to do this globally, not just in one inhospitable patch of mountains. And it seems to me that it is primarily a problem of intelligence and technology, not one of manpower.
Why can't we use all our satellite, aircraft, monitoring, computing power etc. to find terrorists, and then use surgical military force to eradicate them? And why on earth would we need to pacify Afghan cities to accomplish this goal?
And by the way, what happened to capturing Al-Qaeda leadership as the top goal?
The main reason to be in Afghanistan, it seems to me, is to deny terrorists intent on attacking the US and its allies a comfortable base of operations. But we need to do this globally, not just in one inhospitable patch of mountains. And it seems to me that it is primarily a problem of intelligence and technology, not one of manpower.
Why can't we use all our satellite, aircraft, monitoring, computing power etc. to find terrorists, and then use surgical military force to eradicate them? And why on earth would we need to pacify Afghan cities to accomplish this goal?
And by the way, what happened to capturing Al-Qaeda leadership as the top goal?
Advertisement
Although technically two separate nations, Afghanistn and Pakistan are a single inseparable region in regard to Al Qaeda/Taliban alliances and the availability of a porous border to permit those pursued in one part to cross into the other.
This explains the main reason we are in Afghanistan - to prevent Pakistan's nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of Al Qaeda. Pakistan, with U.S. help, has put Pakistani Al Qaeda/Taliban insurgents on the run. However, if they can simply regroup in Afghanistan because the latter has come under the uncontested control of the Taliban, they will never be effectively prevented from destabilizing Pakistan and weakening the ability of the Pakistan government to control the nuclear arsenal.
Whether the additional troops are essential, or whether an alternative strategy for controlling the Taliban in Afghanistan might be preferable, one option we don't have is simply to leave. The U.S./NATO engagement must hope to be replaced by indigenous forces, but that will take time, and in the meantime, we must do the best we can to challenge the insurgents in large areas of the country. The Taliban won't be eradicated, but we have no choice but to maintain sufficient pressure to avert a Taliban takeover.
September 28, 2009 8:32 PM | Reply | Permalink