THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume X, Issue # 286, November 2, 2008
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
AFGHANISTAN WILL BE ANOTHER VIETNAM
By Alan Caruba
U.S. MILITARY INVOLVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN: SHOULD THE U.S.A. WITHDRAW ITS TROOPS FROM AFGHANISTAN
OR EXPAND THE U.S. MILITARY PRESENCE THERE? A DECISION THAT MUST BE MADE BY THE NEXT U.S. PRESIDENT
FULL STORY:
The next President of the United States of America must decide whether to withdraw our troops from Afghanistan or
expand our involvement there. Having lived through the long years of the war in Vietnam, I can tell you that Afghanistan
looks and smells like Vietnam. It is the classic wrong war in the wrong place.
In late October, 2008, I read a small news item about Parwiz Kambakhsh, 24, an Afghan journalism student who had
downloaded and circulated an article about women’s rights under Islam. The news was that his sentence of death had
been overturned by an appellate court that reduced it to a mere twenty years in prison on the charge of blasphemy. He
can still appeal to the Supreme Court of Afghanistan. This is the state of freedom of speech, press, and thought in
Afghanistan.
If you want to know what life was like in the Seventh Century, Afghanistan is the place to go. It is largely devoid of
anything passing for modernity, by which we mean medical facilities, schools, roads, and such. Never mind the
telephones and other detritus of modern life, the conversations have not changed in centuries.
Afghanistan shares a long border with Pakistan and Iran. Also bordering it is Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Turkistan, and
Tajikistan. None of these places is a tourist destination. All are Islamic.
The only reliable element of Afghanistan’s economy is poppy cultivation for the opium trade, which the CIA estimates
generates “roughly $4 billion in illicit economic activity.” This is another way of saying that none of this money reaches
what passes for a central government, except in the form of bribes. It is a major source of funding for the Taliban.
Few Americans were interested in Afghanistan until September 11, 2001. We have had a military presence there for seven
years, along with NATO nation components. Much like the “military advisors” that initiated our involvement in Vietnam,
today’s generals are calling for more troops.
Afghanistan has been conquered and occupied since the days of Alexander the Great. Nothing much comes of it. It
remains a mystery why they bothered. Putting too few or too many troops into Afghanistan does little except to
demonstrate the futility of trying to impose one’s will on people who have resisted every such effort for centuries.
Founded as a nation in 1747, when Ahmad Shah Durrani unified the Pashtun tribes, Afghanistan was primarily seen as a
buffer between the British Empire and the Russian Empire. Constitutionalism and representative democracy, as in most
Middle Eastern nations, have never taken root there.
Afghanistan became the graveyard of the Soviet empire after they intervened militarily in 1979 to support a tottering
Afghan Communist regime. After they withdrew in 1989, the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. It is now known as the
Russian Federation. It is still run by the former KGB. And one wonders why anyone in the U.S. government thinks any
good can come of being in Afghanistan?
The Taliban took control after the Russians left, and Osama bin Laden found a congenial place in which to plan the 9-11
terrorist attack on the U.S.A. That’s why the first U.S. response to the attack occurred in Afghanistan as U.S., allied, and
an anti-Taliban Northern Alliance of tribes were able to drive the Taliban across the border into the frontier provinces of
Pakistan and elsewhere.
The U.S. effort to create a constitutional democratic government there began with a new constitution and, in December,
2004, the election of Hamid Karzai as President. He barely controls Kabul, the capital. The southern and eastern regions
are still beyond control.
In essence, the rule of law barely exists in Afghanistan, if at all, unless you factor in Sharia law, which reflects a Seventh
Century approach to justice. The government and all aspects of official life in Afghanistan are so corrupt that even
President Karzai’s brother is allegedly on the take.
I am neither a military strategist nor an expert in foreign affairs; I cannot lay claim to much more than common sense. So,
I confess it defies my understanding why the United States and our NATO allies are in Afghanistan. Expecting
constitutional democracy to succeed in such a primitive and hostile place seems more a justification for military
occupation than anything else. The whole place is tribal.
Other than his distaste for our invasion of Iraq and disposal of Saddam Hussein, it is baffling that Barack Hussein Obama
says that Afghanistan is the “central front” against al-Qa'ida. The CIA says this terrorist network has no bases in
Afghanistan. The Taliban -- outsiders just like us -- have their own agenda, as seen in their effort to render the place a
complete and total Islamic hellhole.
Little wonder, therefore, that word keeps getting out that both English and French military leaders regard Afghanistan as
virtually beyond any hope without putting a far greater number of troops there. Millions are being spent as it is. Between
2002 and 2007, Germany spent $80 million to reform Afghanistan's police corps. The U.S.A. has budgeted $800 million for
2008 to assist Afghanistan's security forces.
In early October, 2008, General Jean-Louis Geogelin, France’s military chief, confirmed that British Brigadier Mark
Carleton-Smith remarks that “there is no military solution to the Afghan crisis” reflected his own views. The Brigadier
recommended that NATO lower its expectations regarding a happy outcome to the conflict. It was, he said, “unrealistic
and probably incredible” to think that the multinational forces in Afghanistan could rid the country of armed bands.
There are two occupations available to the Afghans. One can either be a farmer raising poppies or one can join an armed
band, be it either the government’s, one’s tribe, or the Taliban’s.
In an October 1, 2008, Christian Science Monitor article, it was reported: “The U.S. military is working to put a
new strategy in place for Afghanistan and Pakistan that could allow it to expand airfields, preposition military forces and
equipment, and prepare for a more robust effort soon against Islamist extremists in the region.” Four more U.S. brigades
are poised to be sent to Afghanistan, including one that will deploy in January, 2009.
I have my own military strategy. Let’s pull our troops out of Afghanistan and, with the Iraqi government's permission,
let’s keep enough troops in Iraq to accomplish two functions: (1) ensure that the Iraqi government can maintain its
security and (2) serve as a deterrent to any conflict which Iran might wish to initiate in the region.
The United States of America has a full plate of problems right now. Expending troops and treasure in Afghanistan
strikes me as a bad investment in a very nasty place. It is an invitation to repeat all the errors of Vietnam.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
Asia -- Central & South Asia -- India & Its Neighbors
American Foreign Policy -- The Middle East
Islamism & Jihadism -- The Threat of Radical Islam
Page Three
Page Two
Page One
Alan Caruba is a veteran business and science writer, a Public Relations Counselor, and Founder of the National Anxiety Center, a
clearinghouse for information about media-driven scare campaigns. Caruba writes a weekly commentary, "Warning Signs," posted
on the Internet website of the National Anxiety Center, which is located at
www.anxietycenter.com.
Caruba has a daily blog at http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com.
Caruba’s most recent book, Right Answers: Separating Fact from Fantasy, has been published by Merril Press. Books
previously authored by Caruba include A Pocket Guide to Militant Islam, The United Nations Versus the United States: The
UN's Plan to Control Planet Earth, and America: A Nation Without Borders -- A Pocket Guide to Immigration Issues.
© Alan Caruba 2008
Published with Permission of Alan Caruba
ACaruba@AOL.Com
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume X, 2008
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Conservative Government Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity