The Real Cost of Losing Afghanistan

By MIKE WHITNEY


It was supposed to be "the good war"; a war against terror; a war of liberation. It was intended to fix the eyes of the world on America's state of the art weaponry, its crack troops and its overwhelming firepower. It was supposed to demonstrate -- once and for all -- that the world's only superpower could no longer be beaten or resisted; that Washington could deploy its troops anywhere in the world and crush its adversaries at will.

Then everything went sideways. The war veered from the Pentagon's script. The Taliban retreated, waited, regrouped and retaliated. They enlisted support from the Pashtuns and the tribal leaders who could see that America would never honor its commitments; that order would never be restored. Operation Enduring Freedom has brought neither peace nor prosperity; just occupation. Seven years have passed and Afghanistan is still ruled by warlords and drug-merchants. Nothing has improved. The country is in shambles and the government is a fraud. The humiliation of foreign occupation persists while the killing goes on with no end in sight.

The Taliban have taken over more than half of Afghanistan. They have conducted military operations in the capital of Kabul. They're dug in at Logar, Wardak and Ghazni and control vast swathes of territory in Zabul, Helmand, Urzgan and Kandahar. Now they are getting ready to step-up operations and mount a Spring offensive, which means the violence will only intensify.

The Taliban's approach is methodical and deliberate. They've shown they can survive the harshest conditions and still achieve tactical victories over a better-equipped enemy. They are highly-motivated and believe their cause is just. After all, they are not fighting to occupy a foreign nation; they're fighting to defend their own country. That strengthens their resolve and keeps morale high. When NATO and American troops leave Afghanistan; the Taliban will remain. The US occupation will just be another footnote in the country's tragic history.

The United States has gained nothing from its invasion of Afghanistan. US troops do not control even a square inch of Afghan soil. The moment a soldier lifts his boot-heel; that ground is returned to the native people. That probably won't change either. General Dan McNeill said recently that "if proper US military counterinsurgency doctrine were followed; the US would need 400,000 troops to defeat Pashtun tribal resistance in Afghanistan." Currently, the US and NATO have only 66,000 troops on the ground and the allies are refusing to send more.

On a purely logistical level; victory is impossible.

The battle for hearts and minds has been lost, too. A statement from the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA) sums it up like this:

"The reinstatement of the Northern Alliance to power crushed the hopes of our people for freedom and prosperity and proved that, for the Bush administration, defeating terrorism has no meaning at all....The US doesn't want to defeat the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, because then they will have no excuse to stay in Afghanistan and achieve their economic and strategic goals in the region....After seven years, there is no peace, human rights, democracy or reconstruction in Afghanistan. The destitution and suffering of our people is increasing everyday. ...We believe that if the troops leave Afghanistan, our people will become more free and come out of their current puzzlement and doubts...Afghanistan's freedom can only be achieved by Afghan people themselves. Relying on one enemy to defeat another is a wrong policy which has just tightened the grip of the Northern Alliance and their masters on the neck of our nation."

Gradually, the Allies will see that Bush's war cannot be won and that continuing the fighting is counterproductive. There is no military solution to the conflict in Afghanistan and the political objectives are getting murkier all the time. This just adds to the growing sense of frustration.

Recently Secretary of Defense Robert Gates tried to cajole the allies into sending more combat troops to fight in the south, but he met with stiff resistance . He said:

"I am concerned that many people on this continent may not comprehend the magnitude of the direct threat to European security," Gates said. "We must not become a two-tiered alliance of those who are willing to fight and those who are not. Such a development, with all its implications for collective security, would in effect destroy the alliance."

But support for the war is waning in Europe. This is America's war, not theirs. Europeans don't need to occupy foreign nations to meet their energy needs. Their countries are prosperous and they can afford to buy for fuel on the open market. Only America wants the war. It's all part of a geopolitical "grand strategy" to project US power into the region to control its resources. So far, there's no indication that the plan will succeed.

Germany has the third biggest economy in the world. Over the last few years, they have strengthened ties with Russia and made agreements that will satisfy their long-term energy needs. But German involvement in Afghanistan has put a strain on relations with Moscow. Putin thinks that the US is using the war to put down roots in Central Asia so it can control pipeline-routes from the Caspian Basin and surround Russia and China with military bases. Naturally, Putin would like to persuade Chancellor Angela Merkel to withdraw German troops from Afghanistan so he could strike a blow against the US-led alliance.

Eventually, German leaders will see that it's foolish to tweak the nose of the people who provide them with energy (Russia) just to support Washington's adventures. When Germany withdraws from Afghanistan; NATO will disband, new coalitions will form, and the transatlantic alliance fall apart. The cracks are already visible.

Bush has said that the war in Afghanistan must continue or the country will become a haven for drugs, terrorism and organized crime. He says we are fighting a "poisonous ideology of Islamic extremism which threatens to become a global movement".

But the Taliban and Pashtun tribesmen see it differently. They see the conflict as an imperial war of aggression which has only added to the suffering of their people. A recent report by the United Nations Human Development Fund appears to support this view. It shows that Afghanistan has fallen in every category. The average life expectancy has gone down, malnutrition has risen, literacy has dropped, and more than half the population is living below the poverty-line. Hundreds of thousands of people have been internally displaced by the war.
Afghanistan now produces 90 per cent of the world's opium; more than any other country. The booming drug trade is the direct result of the US invasion. Bush has created the world's largest narco-colony. Is that success?

Presently, there are no plans to remove the warlords or improve the lives of ordinary Afghans. Reconstruction is at a standstill. If the US stays in Afghanistan, the situation 10 years from now will be the same as it is today, only more people will have needlessly died. Most Afghans now understand that the promise of democracy was a lie. The only thing the occupation has brought is more grinding poverty and random violence.

There's no back-up plan for Afghanistan. In fact, there is no plan at all. The administration thought the Taliban would see America's high-tech, laser-guided weaponry and run for the hills. They did. Now they're back. And now we are embroiled in an "unwinnable" war with a tenacious enemy that grows stronger by the day._Eventually, the Europeans will see the futility of the war and leave. And that will be the end of NATO

Wow I had no idea we had "lost" the war in Afghanistan or even that we were "losing" it? "unwinable"?Thanks Mike Whitney!:jointsmile:

well ignorance is bliss.so now u know

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishman3811

well ignorance is bliss.so now u know

---

you realize mike whitney is a far left nut job, who will sit back and try to convince people that George Bush caused Hurricane Katrina, I think you are in fact the ignorant one!! :stoned:

But he pretty much nails this topic on the head.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zeitgeist

But he pretty much nails this topic on the head.

---

haha I agree :>

The Taliban doesn't have to win...they only have to "not lose"...like the V.C. they only have to wait.

They can wait 5-10-20 years or more...their not going anywhere, it's their home.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dutch Pimp

The Taliban doesn't have to win...they only have to "not lose"...like the V.C. they only have to wait.

They can wait 5-10-20 years or more...their not going anywhere, it's their home.

---

aye, and there's the rub :thumbsup:

The V.C. had alot more support from people on the homefront though.
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VMbJK5vH3c[/YOUTUBE]

Have a good one!:s4:

well Pakistan is the Taliban's China of the Vietnam War.

This shit will go on forever

I'd say it's Iran.........
U. S. reports capturing Iranian-made weapons bound for Taliban - International Herald Tribune
Coalition: Taliban have Iran arms - CNN.com
The Blotter: Document: Iran Caught Red-Handed Shipping Arms to Taliban

And the list goes on and on.......

Have a good one!:s4:

There's no way to win militarily in the middle east. Unless we want to just nuke the whole area. Russia tried to take Afghanistan and got there butt kicked and we'll end up the same way. There has to be better way to address these countries rather than just sending soldiers over there to die.

"Russia tried to take Afghanistan"....that's the key phrase. We are getting rid of an element that 80%+ of the country wanted removed. Not to mention allowing them to set up their own government, build a military. Things that Russia never considered.

They wouldn't stand from going from one master to another; Russia was an empire builder while we are helping them build their own country. They have a Constitution in place that THEY voted on...likewise Government officials that they voted in.

Have a good one!:s4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killerweed420

There's no way to win militarily in the middle east. Unless we want to just nuke the whole area. Russia tried to take Afghanistan and got there butt kicked and we'll end up the same way. There has to be better way to address these countries rather than just sending soldiers over there to die.

---

There is a better way, and I've said it before: Let the Chinese have at them. Boycott Middle East oil and let them sell it to China. If Bin Laden and his baboons try terrorism on the Chinese, they'll string them up from meathooks, and mercilessly burn down every rathole town, village and neighborhood that these terrorist scum crawled out of - without regard for anybody or anything. They know how to stop this bullshit.

The war in Afghanistan is our new forgotten war.

Afghanistan will end up like Iraq and other countries we deal with. They will just have puppet governments with the strings being pulled by the US government. Leave them alone till they bring the battle to us. Then no holds bared, we disarm the country. I know Americans are afraid of dieing but its part of living in a democracy. Now everyone is going to like us, but it doesn't mean we have to force them to have a democracy.

P4B well they may have a constituation but it means diddly squat.Their is no government in Afghanistan.President Karzia wrong spelling btw is the President of Kabul and nothing more he has no power outside of Kabul.The rest of Afghanistan is ruled by Drug lords and other militias.You may as well wipe your ass with the constitution because thats the only thing its good for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud

"Russia tried to take Afghanistan"....that's the key phrase. We are getting rid of an element that 80%+ of the country wanted removed. Not to mention allowing them to set up their own government, build a military. Things that Russia never considered.

They wouldn't stand from going from one master to another; Russia was an empire builder while we are helping them build their own country. They have a Constitution in place that THEY voted on...likewise Government officials that they voted in.

Have a good one!:s4:

---

So, we're not empire building? Let's be truthful here. The only reason we are in Afghanistan is to protect the Uno-Cal pipeline going through the country. The Oil coming out of the northern regions needs to be piped to Packistan and on to the sea. The route through Afghanistan is the shortest and thusly the least expensive, Capiche?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by medicinal

So, we're not empire building? Let's be truthful here. The only reason we are in Afghanistan is to protect the Uno-Cal pipeline going through the country. The Oil coming out of the northern regions needs to be piped to Packistan and on to the sea. The route through Afghanistan is the shortest and thusly the least expensive, Capiche?

---

I read that very same thing on some Lyndon LaRouche propoganda about 4 years ago, we obviously came to two different conclusions though. You must have a different take on "empire building".:wtf:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishman3811

P4B well they may have a constituation but it means diddly squat.Their is no government in Afghanistan. You may as well wipe your ass with the constitution because thats the only thing its good for.

---

Seems you feel that way about most countries constitutions....why should Afghanistan be any different?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by medicinal

The only reason we are in Afghanistan is to protect the Uno-Cal pipeline going through the country.

---

Really? I recall different reasons for the invasion.

Have a good one!:s4:

LOL only in countries where they can hang you for changing your religion from Islam to Cathlic.Or where you can get jailed for voicing your opinion on womans rights.BTW Pakistan is where the taliban regroup not Iran.The Pashtun tribal areas of Pakistan is where the Taliban plan their next attacks into Afghanistan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishman3811

The Pashtun tribal areas of Pakistan is where the Taliban plan their next attacks into Afghanistan

---

But according to your article they control Afghanistan. Why go to Pakistan when for planning?:wtf:

Have a good one!:s4:

So that they can regroup and rearm. They know that no one will touch them in Pakistan. They are pretty safe there

And sometimes they control Afghanistan. It goes back and forth on who controls areas

There is a need for a hell of alot more troops than what is currently their.NATO is unwilling to send the nessary troops America doesnt have the troops to send so we have this clusterfuck in Afghanistan.The Taliban just has to wait everyone out.

The first step: somebody needs to get their happy ass in there, and find out what it would take to get the Taliban to break their alliance with al Qaida. al Qaida gives them money, we can do that, what else do they want...find out.

This is a job for President Karzai. A truce is better than guerrilla warfare. Find out what it would take; go from there. A truce would be a nice start...:thumbsup:

Dutch Pimp i agree with u 100% but when u have so many different warlords with different agendas i dont know if a truce is feasable.I dont think the Taliban would ever break their alliance with the Taliban because their pissed at America and they want their country back.

The same was said about Iraq but sectarian violence is almost a thing of the past now.

They want their country back? They got it...to bad that they are the radical minority.

Have a good one!:s4: