When Steve Bannon was booted out of the White House, my thoughts turned immediately to war. As I wrote in frustration on Friday,
Bannon’s departure probably means the slim chance that the US might withdraw from “our” open-ended, never-ending occupation of Afghanistan has been foreclosed.
If we don’t win the war by ushering in a completely transformed, modernized and westernized Afghanistan, at least our children and grandchildren and great grandchildren, etc., etc., will each have. their turn.
Of course, if the fabled “Graveyard of Empires” continues to work its historic magic, maybe future generations won’t face that burden: the United States could fall . . . as a worldwide imperial presence. And, if our global military archipelago fails — for, say, want of wealth to throw overseas — do we have any reason to believe that our republic would bounce back?
There remains more than enough reason to work for foreign policy sanity.
Prior to his evening national address on the day of the eclipse, Trump explained what he intends to do in Afghanistan — send 4,000 more troops.
Meanwhile, Steve Bannon’s door-slapped rump did not dissuade him from tweeting out what he intends to do “on Capitol Hills, in the media, and in corporate America”:
If there’s any confusion out there, let me clear it up: I’m leaving the White House and going to war for Trump against his opponents. . . .
Call this the Bugs Bunny Policy: “Of course, you know, this means war!”
And considering the promises made in the President’s speech, we can amend that to “of course, this means never-ending war.”
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
3 replies on “Of Course, You Know, This Means War”
How do we ever, in our lifetime or even in the next thousand years create a “completely transformed, modernized and westernized Afghanistan”?
As powerful as the US military is, it can’t save people who don’t want to be saved. It can’t help people who don’t want to be helped. It’s time to leave Afghanistan and let it manage as it has for the last thousand years. In time, the people of Afghanistan will have the government they deserve. Let them harbor terrorists, if they want to. We can protect ourselves by denying access to the US to anyone (other than diplomats or other government officials) who travels into or out of Afghanistan.
Japan and Germany don’t hold up well as models. Japan feared the Soviets more than it did the US. Germany was destroyed in WWII. Again, the west Germans feared the Soviets more than they did the Americans. Both had a reason to cooperate with us. Afghanistan has none.
I’d forgotten the Bugs Bunny phrase. Thanks for reminding me, and in the perfect context. Few analysts are suggesting that the foundation of most if not all US military activity in the Middle East is on behalf of the Apartheid State of Palestinian (chiefly) ethnic cleansing and perpetual war crime practitioner (along with its US vassal): Israel. It’s called the Greater Israel Project… and Ken O’Keefe gives a stirring analysis on RT here: http://bit.ly/2sxq4px_Greater_Israel_Agenda
War, and especially war supported by outside economic powers, is not a good answer. Wars stop when the supply of combatants and the resources of one side are exhausted before that of the other.
All things have the natural courses and ends if left to themselves.
We do these countries and peoples very little by assisting one or the other side. The most common result is to prolonging and exacerbating the conflict.
When two significant powers are on opposite sides in a surrogate war the result is disaster, actually a prescription for the genocide of both of the actual belligerents. An independently financed war ends only upon exhaustion of the supply of combatants.
It is only post war, and because nature and economics abhor a vacuum, the rebuilding actually begins. Before there is a cessation of actual hostility all humanitarian aid morphs into a part of the support to continue the battling.
As Dylan asked, “When will they ever learn?”