U.S. is lost in Afghanistan

Chicago Tribune ^ | May 31, 2004 | Robert Novak

[End Times Sentinel]

In Afghanistan, we should be looking at ways to get the locals up to snuff to take over the remainder of the job.

 

An interesting point you bring up.  I was reading Thomas Sowell's Barbarians Inside the Gates this a.m. and came upon an essay called Misunderstanding the Marshall Plan.  His key point is the truth behind John Stuart Mills statement that "what is crucial is the 'human capital' needed to build or rebuild the physical things"

 

I think it's clear that Afghanistan is clearly lacking in human capital.  I'm not sure what we can hope to attain as far as creating anything more than a third world backwater can go.  Our best hope is to help them progress to a point where they actually have something to lose if the Taliban and al-Queda return.

 

They won't be an industrialized democracy anytime in the foreseeable future, but there's plenty of backwater hell holes that aren't hosting al-Queda.

Owl_Eagle

”Guns Before Butter.”

[JasonC]

They don't need to be South Korea. But they do need a functioning political system. "Functioning" does not equal "perfect" - we don't need to make the Hindu Kush into Arizona and we should not expect to. Just sufficient power in the hands of basically just men able to confidently wield it to keep worse men at bay. Then it is their job, and we go home.

[POA2]

Wherever UBL is, Iran or Pakistan - we should be going in to get him! Period. It has been 3 years. Our SOF guys should have all the leeway needed along with any assets needed. Period.

The fact is because of military lawyers and other higher-ups (within the military) we have not captured or killed Al Zawahiri, Omar and perhaps UBL (though my gut tells me he is dead). There has been actionable Intel that has been skunked because of worries of possible casualty rates or the Intel location being on the Pakistan "side".

This is wrong. If our guys on on the ground to get UBL and the rest, well, then by damn, you better allow them to "go get'em".

[wireman]

"It's in no one's interest to say he's dead---except his"

Wrong! If we announce his demise, all the liberal wussies in the government and the press will declare the war on terror a success and demand that it come to an end. As long as he "lives", he's a poster boy. Until his body turns up, he will be considered alive. Until he turns up with something more than a garbled audio tape, I believe he's deader than Kelsey's nuts!

[Brilliant]

Why does that make my post wrong? Don't you think he wants us to pull out?

[Ole Okie]

I remember there was one woman Representative and may be others in the House that voted against the declaration of war.

Jeanette Rankin, R from Montana, was the only representative to vote against the war on Japan.

There were, I believe, 49 votes against the war on Germany.

The country was singularly united in supporting the war. If you remember, we had 16 million men under arms from a total population of 130 million (IIRC).

So nearly every family in the country was affected by having members in the armed forces. There wouldn't have been a hell of a lot of sympathy for anyone who opposed the war. I don't remember hearing anyone take that position.

[liberallarry]

How is one to decide whether you or Novak is correct?

Novak is pretty well connected and I believe him when he says he's interviewed troops and he's just reporting what they told him.

But you also sound well-informed and what you say is in line with what others posters with first hand experience report.

You may not like Novak, he may be old, he may hate Bush, but there's no evidence he's senile, incompetent, or a liar.

[finnman69]

Yes, "outing CIA agents" at the request of the Bush Regime.

Regime? take your Noam Chomsky crap back to the Underground.

[CWOJackson]

"...but there's no evidence he's senile, incompetent, or a liar."

Only the fiction he writes.