In an historical sense, there's really nothing we or anyone else can do to save these people from themselves. The state of mind that encourages several thousand defenders to run for their lives when challenged by a few hundred lightly-armed insurgents is itself emblematic of an entire culture that cannot overcome its own internal divisions in order to survive.
Sunnis and Shiites used to be able to live together in the same country, albeit on unequaled terms depending upon where they lived, but civil society could still be maintained, and it did for more than a thousand years. No longer, and not because one side is inherently stronger than the other. Quite to the contrary, the weakness of both sides encourages the fanatics. Neither Sunni nor Shia are willing to control their most radical elements. Consequently, evenhandedness and moderation invites retaliation by both sides.
The idea, then, that the United States can somehow bring order to the region by training resistance fighters against the Islamic State has become a mirage. Time and again, weaponry given to supposedly 'reliable' fighters ends up in the hands of those who oppose us.
We may be able to help those who wish to flee the cauldron that is Syria and Iraq, and quarantine what remains in order to defeat the Islamic State eventually; but that will not happen as long as sectarian supremacy remains more important than civil peace and national unity. Only when that changes will there be a chance for anything better.
Sunnis and Shiites used to be able to live together in the same country, albeit on unequaled terms depending upon where they lived, but civil society could still be maintained, and it did for more than a thousand years. No longer, and not because one side is inherently stronger than the other. Quite to the contrary, the weakness of both sides encourages the fanatics. Neither Sunni nor Shia are willing to control their most radical elements. Consequently, evenhandedness and moderation invites retaliation by both sides.
The idea, then, that the United States can somehow bring order to the region by training resistance fighters against the Islamic State has become a mirage. Time and again, weaponry given to supposedly 'reliable' fighters ends up in the hands of those who oppose us.
We may be able to help those who wish to flee the cauldron that is Syria and Iraq, and quarantine what remains in order to defeat the Islamic State eventually; but that will not happen as long as sectarian supremacy remains more important than civil peace and national unity. Only when that changes will there be a chance for anything better.
2
This may wind up like our training of deadly suppressionist forces in Latin America a generation or so ago. Do we have clue what we are doing? Or precisely why?
If ISIS is in fact a threat to us, we aren't going to beat it by organizing the disorganized and motivating the unmotivated.
If ISIS is in fact a threat to us, we aren't going to beat it by organizing the disorganized and motivating the unmotivated.
"American officials once heralded Mali’s military as an exemplary partner. But in 2012, battle-hardened Islamist fighters returned from combat in Libya to rout the military, including units trained by United States Special Forces."
Actual combat is the most effective training a fighter can have. But it is, literally, mortally hard on trainees. By deconstructing Libya and creating a battlefield where Islamist militants could become seasoned combat veterans, we provided them training superior to that which we provided the Mali military. Little surprise then that they were routed. We met the enemy and he was (trained by) us.
Actual combat is the most effective training a fighter can have. But it is, literally, mortally hard on trainees. By deconstructing Libya and creating a battlefield where Islamist militants could become seasoned combat veterans, we provided them training superior to that which we provided the Mali military. Little surprise then that they were routed. We met the enemy and he was (trained by) us.
1
What surprises me is that our "experts" are surprised by this. We spend billions giving the best training soldiers and police and equipping them with the best weapons. What we can't give them with all that money is the will to fight. Without the will to fight, all those weapons and all that training means nothing. The same thing happened in Vietnam. When our are leaders going to understand that our system and our way of doing things does not work for everybody and does not appeal to everybody?
1
Millions of Americans disagreed with and protested against George Bush's government using 9/11 to try and "Americanize" and "democratize" the middle east. "It's not worth it," we repeatedly said, "use intelligence operations against the 9/11 attackers alone -- the same way we normally respond to terrorist attacks -- but don't start overthrowing governments and replacing them with new dictators. Don't start trying to Americanize and control the middle east."
George Bush's government didn't listen. Now the middle east has been destabilized and we're seeing civil wars and foreign militants (Isis being the most well known but including Al Qaeda groups and many other groups) turning the region into a bloodbath. Obama's government is listening and currently trying to avoid getting us involved in this new Vietnam. But to some extent we're responsible for the mess we allowed war criminals George Bush and Co. to start. (The term "war criminal" is due to their repeated use of false intelligence + their demanding the torture of prisoners of war.)
George Bush's government didn't listen. Now the middle east has been destabilized and we're seeing civil wars and foreign militants (Isis being the most well known but including Al Qaeda groups and many other groups) turning the region into a bloodbath. Obama's government is listening and currently trying to avoid getting us involved in this new Vietnam. But to some extent we're responsible for the mess we allowed war criminals George Bush and Co. to start. (The term "war criminal" is due to their repeated use of false intelligence + their demanding the torture of prisoners of war.)
Has Cheney been President for the last six and a half years?
"Let's leave aside the fact that we can't control the absolute messes we ourselves created (thanks, Cheney)..."
Suppose it were late 2007 and people were blaming Bill Clinton and Al Gore, rather than Bush/Cheney -- would that strike you as fair?
"Let's leave aside the fact that we can't control the absolute messes we ourselves created (thanks, Cheney)..."
Suppose it were late 2007 and people were blaming Bill Clinton and Al Gore, rather than Bush/Cheney -- would that strike you as fair?
Yes, indeed, we've seen this movie before:
"Have we seen this movie before? Americans at the end of the tunnel spent huge sum of money to train the local fighters so that Americans can honorably withdraw and then blame the local government and army for failing leadership."
So how about we just shortcut the process, leave tomorrow, and spend the money we save to write speeches blaming the local government and army for failing leadership? We could probably wrap it all up by the end of the year.
"Have we seen this movie before? Americans at the end of the tunnel spent huge sum of money to train the local fighters so that Americans can honorably withdraw and then blame the local government and army for failing leadership."
So how about we just shortcut the process, leave tomorrow, and spend the money we save to write speeches blaming the local government and army for failing leadership? We could probably wrap it all up by the end of the year.
Who can forget George W. Bush's explanation for why people in other countries don't like the US government?
"They hate us for our freedom."
I remember my reaction to that statement, fairly summarized as:
"Huh?"
I doubt a single human being who's lived in the Middle East in the last 50 years has attacked any of us because they resent our being free. They just want us to leave them alone. Why is that so hard to see? Why is it so hard to do just that?
"They hate us for our freedom."
I remember my reaction to that statement, fairly summarized as:
"Huh?"
I doubt a single human being who's lived in the Middle East in the last 50 years has attacked any of us because they resent our being free. They just want us to leave them alone. Why is that so hard to see? Why is it so hard to do just that?
2
"They hate us for our freedom" is neocon mantra.
Such conceit is the core of "American Exceptionalism".
Such conceit is the core of "American Exceptionalism".
"The age of hard power is gone. Can we just concentrate on building soft power?"
If people in other countries hate you because you try to impose "hard power" on them, your chances of building "soft power" drop considerably.
If people in other countries hate you because you try to impose "hard power" on them, your chances of building "soft power" drop considerably.
Are these the only two choices?
"... the only alternative to using these proxies is to send US troops back into combat and there is no general enthusiasm for that either in the administration or amongst the public at large."
If proxies won't do, and there's no enthusiasm for sending in our own troops, is there a third choice -- such as staying out of it entirely?
"... the only alternative to using these proxies is to send US troops back into combat and there is no general enthusiasm for that either in the administration or amongst the public at large."
If proxies won't do, and there's no enthusiasm for sending in our own troops, is there a third choice -- such as staying out of it entirely?
1
Glad to see I'm not the only one who's noticed this:
"The US spent a lot of time laughing at the Soviet Union for getting embroiled in Afghanistan but we've allowed ourselves to be sucked into a similar situation..."
Exactly. And while the Soviet Union was there a long time, we've now been there much longer.
"The US spent a lot of time laughing at the Soviet Union for getting embroiled in Afghanistan but we've allowed ourselves to be sucked into a similar situation..."
Exactly. And while the Soviet Union was there a long time, we've now been there much longer.
After the Soviet Union imploded I warned friends not to gloat too much because it would happen to us too; several decades later. It's an inevitable consequence of empire.
This is why Biden should run. It was obvious to him ten years ago that Iraq should be partitioned. He also had the courage to say that we should fight a small, counter terrorism mission in Afghanistan, unlike his cynical boss who "split the difference" with a trendy faux counter insurgency campaign he never intended to see through from the moment he signed on to it.
The generals should have resigned the second the Afghan troop drawdowns were timed to coincide with American election campaigns, as it was clear they didn't have the political commitment to win the war in Afghanistan. We didn't need Marines in Helmand to find Bin Laden, it could have been accomplished just the same under Biden's alternative.
It's more obvious in retrospect, but was clear then too, that we weren't determined to defeat the Taliban, since we weren't going to pressure Pakistan in any serious way.
Having said all that, our forces fought with distinction and honor over these last fifteen years, and gave various peoples of the Middle East the chance to build better, Islamist free societies. With the exception of the Kurds they have chosen not to.
What motivates people to fight in Western Asia? Allah or ethnicity, or maybe both. We can't make them fight for states they don't believe in.
There were people who were right at crucial points in the past, like Biden, and we need to reward them.
The generals should have resigned the second the Afghan troop drawdowns were timed to coincide with American election campaigns, as it was clear they didn't have the political commitment to win the war in Afghanistan. We didn't need Marines in Helmand to find Bin Laden, it could have been accomplished just the same under Biden's alternative.
It's more obvious in retrospect, but was clear then too, that we weren't determined to defeat the Taliban, since we weren't going to pressure Pakistan in any serious way.
Having said all that, our forces fought with distinction and honor over these last fifteen years, and gave various peoples of the Middle East the chance to build better, Islamist free societies. With the exception of the Kurds they have chosen not to.
What motivates people to fight in Western Asia? Allah or ethnicity, or maybe both. We can't make them fight for states they don't believe in.
There were people who were right at crucial points in the past, like Biden, and we need to reward them.
Agree with the general tenet of the article. But would like to point out that our interventions and nation building efforts have failed at a greater rate than our training efforts. The major difference is that in the intervention effort Americans died for someone elses freedom while in the training effort, the trainees die in their fight for freedom (or they throw down their arms and flee).
What is truly disturbing here is that most Americans simply don't give a damn. As long as they can insert their faces into their electronic devices and "escape", all is well in their small world. The dumbing down of America continues at an alarming pace. Devoid of leadership and anyone who gives a damn, we are an empire soon to spiral into collapse. And we surely deserve our fate, we have done nothing to demand accountability from our elected "leadership". All these billions of dollars and lives lost .....Shame on us....every living and breathing American shares in this shame.
2
America is still tying to fight battles for Richard, The Lion Heart; I say give it up; our mission should be to make life within these United States of America a decent place for Americans to live; stop trying the feed the beast of capitalist expansion and protecting the "holy land."
1
I feel the same way, but as long as the United States is essentially run by corporations, nothing shall change.
Please sign up to fight for the Sykes-Picot agreement made behind your backs after politically knifing Lawrence... no, scratch that, please sign up to risk your life fighting for some Western arm chair idealistic idea of what Iraq ought to look like... no, scratch that, please sign up to fight for your right to sell oil to only western companies with no Iranian meddling... no, scratch that, please sign up to fight relentlessly with tooth and nail for no pay because your officers and political leaders steal not only your meager pay, but sell the bullets you need to fight... no, scatch that, please flee to Europe because the mid-East is collapsing into banditry and barbarism....
Please, stop pouring my money down this rat hole of futility, year after year after dreary, pointless, murderous year. Remember the definition of madness!
www.endthemadnessnow.org
www.endthemadnessnow.org
4
Back in Jauary of 2014, Eric Schmitt was quoting anonymous American government functionaries about the danger of pulling out of Afghanistan efore we got their forces trained.
Now it turns out, trying to train foreign armies is a very expensive fool's errand. And nobody on the Times' national security beat or in the Pentagon has even the vaguest memory of the failure of "Vietnamization," almost half a century ago. We need to stop fighting other people's fights. And it would help if our military would refrain from killing Doctors Without Borders.
Now it turns out, trying to train foreign armies is a very expensive fool's errand. And nobody on the Times' national security beat or in the Pentagon has even the vaguest memory of the failure of "Vietnamization," almost half a century ago. We need to stop fighting other people's fights. And it would help if our military would refrain from killing Doctors Without Borders.
2
Our taxpayer dollars at work.
Swimmingly.
Obama is no smarter than Bush.
Disappointer in chief.
Swimmingly.
Obama is no smarter than Bush.
Disappointer in chief.
2
Reviewing this history and drawing some baleful conclusions, Dick Cheney took a lickin' and keeps on tickin'. I am generally agnostic, but I'm beginning to wonder who's in control here.
Since these soldiers we train have no loyalty to us, nor the excuse of a government in their land the only way to have them fight is out of self interest.
Offer every one of them their own 7-11 to run in America, and citizenship, after they serve 8 years with no demerits on their military record and see if that works. Let's be realistic, that region has no jobs and no prospects for advancement for young men and women other than through corruption and terrorism.
Offer them more than small arms training and a chance to die and maybe you can get some results.
Offer every one of them their own 7-11 to run in America, and citizenship, after they serve 8 years with no demerits on their military record and see if that works. Let's be realistic, that region has no jobs and no prospects for advancement for young men and women other than through corruption and terrorism.
Offer them more than small arms training and a chance to die and maybe you can get some results.
1
The article should read "Billions From U.S. Fail to Sustain a Democracy". Democracies exist where the will of the people provides for it. To think one can "buy" democracy is a de facto oxymoron. Money buys power and corruption. In some places it's just a little prettier than others.
1
One more lesson from Vietnam comes home to roost.
1
Read, or re-read, Dwight Eisenhower’s farewell address to the nation as President in 1961, also known as the “Military Industrial Complex Speech”. With military spending, he warned that “the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.”*
54 years later, after Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq, and the old general is still right.
With “Citizens United” and “McCutcheon” from the Supreme Court, his words are even truer.
________________________________________________
*Military Industrial Complex Speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1/17/61:
http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html
54 years later, after Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq, and the old general is still right.
With “Citizens United” and “McCutcheon” from the Supreme Court, his words are even truer.
________________________________________________
*Military Industrial Complex Speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1/17/61:
http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html
3
And the Obama failures keep on acomin'.......
2
Let us ask Obama to please give us a figure of the dollar amount spent per each American citizen in this unsuccesful Middle East muddle operation and also remind him of his comment on ISIL. I voted for him twice.
1
If were going to waste money, can we at least do it on our own soil?
3
The notion that any significant number of people in either Iraq or Syria or Afghanistan or Libya nourish anything like a "national interest" is clearly wishful thinking. Tribal interests? Yes. Sectarian interests? Yes. But, national interests? No.
Get out now. And stay out.
Get out now. And stay out.
2
Have we seen this movie before? Americans at the end of the tunnel spent huge sum of money to train the local fighters so that Americans can honorably withdraw and then blame the local government and army for failing leadership. When you have to spend huge sum of money to train and equip the local army, you have failed to justify why you were there in the first place and that you have not learned the main reasons of the conflict.
War is forever, if you don't want to compete then fine but shut up and suffer quietly with the rest of us.
The real lesson is that we can't control the mindset of the people in these foreign countries. However, I fear the hidden agenda by the politicians, who understand the aforesaid, is to keep feeding the military industrial complex, to enrich themselves. Sad.
The Bush administration created this mess, which President Obama is cleaning up. Of course billions are being spent, all for nought. The military profiteers earned huge sums during the war in Iraq now the American taxpayers are saddled with training soldiers who don't want to fight.
2
Please. Cleaning up? The President has made disastrous decisions on his own. He has been in office for some time. Responsibility, please!
I wish the US govt would stop crying and whining about the Russian bombing Syrian rebels, where were they when Turkey bombs the Kurds rebels, that right they knew and agreed. If Russian finally wants back in, let have it let be there problem and money down the drain. Our record of training the Syrian rebels has been a joke and we all know about Iraq. Save the money and forget this place let the Russian find their own grave yard.
2
Some in the military really aren't bothered by Russia helping but the NYT won't investigate that portion of the whole story because Obama and democrats don't really care how many lives are lost as long as it isn't them.
You can bring money, weapons, ammunition, and training to people, but you can't make them fight. All the resources that the US has poured into Afghanistan since 2003 and it seems like all the Taliban had to do was bide its time. The sudden shifting focus to ISIS and the growing discontent among the Afghanistan civilians with the violence and corruption perpetrated by the Afghan military and local authorities have created a prime condition for a resurgence of Taliban action.
The real lesson is that you can't democratize a country by invading and occupying it.
7
Nor should we want to democratize many of these troubled nations. That's how you get ayatollahs, Hamas, Latin American leaders, Putin, Hitler and others who win the popular vote.
This notion that democracy is inherently a good thing is fundamentally flawed. Our own nation is famous for allowing majorities to tread on the rights of minorities for generations at a time.
Popularity is fine for homecoming queens and American idol, not for protecting and preserving the rights of those who need it most.
This notion that democracy is inherently a good thing is fundamentally flawed. Our own nation is famous for allowing majorities to tread on the rights of minorities for generations at a time.
Popularity is fine for homecoming queens and American idol, not for protecting and preserving the rights of those who need it most.
Our (political) General Pertaeus and CIA director Panetta need to be summoned to the hill and asked to explain why even after spending twice WWII costs, they could not defeat the rag-tag Taliban and Sadaam's hench-men.
One was busy sleeping with his auto-biographer and the other was busy deliberately mis-leading the president of the United States. Both are now enjoying their generous retirement packages while struggling American households foot the bill of their blunders.
One was busy sleeping with his auto-biographer and the other was busy deliberately mis-leading the president of the United States. Both are now enjoying their generous retirement packages while struggling American households foot the bill of their blunders.
4
Who are these people and our soldiers really fighting for? Energy (oil & gas) companies/interests and their shareholders of course! Nothing else matters anymore. Nothing. Not our nation's children, old people, unemployed (or employed), health care starved, education, infrastructure, etc. It is ALL about natural resources, that is it. End of story. And it will not change until 'We the People' decide we've had enough of these illegal, foreign follies and our treasury endlessly looted by the Pentagon Pirates, Inc. These thieving, lying criminals should all be hung from the yard arms until they're dry. All of them.
5
Strategy? President Obama has a strategy? And here I thought it was all simply the republicans fault, and anyone who questions Obama is a warmonger hater. Good to know there's more to it than that!
5
Excellent article. Excellent top comments.
The neocons and whole security/mercenary establishment that is demanding more needs to know we will not support their pursuit of oil and profits, ignoring all human decency.
These wars have ruined too many countries including ours.
The neocons and whole security/mercenary establishment that is demanding more needs to know we will not support their pursuit of oil and profits, ignoring all human decency.
These wars have ruined too many countries including ours.
2
National media is afraid to challenge likes of Sen McCain, Graham and others always espousing "bomb-bomb", this timidity allows for public brainwashing as that being necessary solutions.
Excuse me, but HRC is as bellicose as they come.
Bush was an evil war criminal.
Obama, with his Nobel Peace Prize, was a savior
Now that the war has gone on for most of both their administrations, and continues, and four times as many US military service members have died in Afghanistan under Commander in Chief Obama as died under Busch, does anyone see much of a difference?
Question is, who is worse?
Obama, with his Nobel Peace Prize, was a savior
Now that the war has gone on for most of both their administrations, and continues, and four times as many US military service members have died in Afghanistan under Commander in Chief Obama as died under Busch, does anyone see much of a difference?
Question is, who is worse?
3
Bush was far worse. That's easy.
The reason for the rise in KIAs is due to Obama prioritizing Afghanistan, and ending the folly of Bush's Iraq.
It's not rocket science.
The reason for the rise in KIAs is due to Obama prioritizing Afghanistan, and ending the folly of Bush's Iraq.
It's not rocket science.
Ending the folly of Bush's Iraq. I see
FACT Obama Dec 14, 2011 Fort Bragg NC
"Now Iraq is not perfect place. It has many challenges ahead. But we're leaving behind a sovereign, stable and self reliant Iraq, with a representative government that was elected by it's people. We're building a new partnership between our nations."
It appears that President Obama did not share your sentiment does he. So how do you defend your comment in light of what Obama said?
Can you also address the FACT that Obama ignored intelligence reports about ISIS for over a year? Do you agree that ISIS is not a geopolitical threat? Why is it that Obama failed to develop a comprehensive plan and repeatedly lied when he said that the Pentagon had not submitted plans when they did? Can you tell me what Obama did about the over 2 million Christians slaughtered in Iraq?
Let's talk about the state of Libya after Obama went in there. Care to talk about the video showing rebels jumping into the pool from the balcony from the ambassador's residence?
Let's talk about his counter terrorism success in Yemen. I guess it's customary to evacuate a success isn't it.
Would you like to talk about Syria, and Obama's failure to stop Assad from using chemical weapons on his own people? Would you talk about his failure to depose Assad?
The rise in ISIS is due to Obama ignoring the threat and blaming Bush for it, despite his 2011 statement. It's not rocket science.
FACT Obama Dec 14, 2011 Fort Bragg NC
"Now Iraq is not perfect place. It has many challenges ahead. But we're leaving behind a sovereign, stable and self reliant Iraq, with a representative government that was elected by it's people. We're building a new partnership between our nations."
It appears that President Obama did not share your sentiment does he. So how do you defend your comment in light of what Obama said?
Can you also address the FACT that Obama ignored intelligence reports about ISIS for over a year? Do you agree that ISIS is not a geopolitical threat? Why is it that Obama failed to develop a comprehensive plan and repeatedly lied when he said that the Pentagon had not submitted plans when they did? Can you tell me what Obama did about the over 2 million Christians slaughtered in Iraq?
Let's talk about the state of Libya after Obama went in there. Care to talk about the video showing rebels jumping into the pool from the balcony from the ambassador's residence?
Let's talk about his counter terrorism success in Yemen. I guess it's customary to evacuate a success isn't it.
Would you like to talk about Syria, and Obama's failure to stop Assad from using chemical weapons on his own people? Would you talk about his failure to depose Assad?
The rise in ISIS is due to Obama ignoring the threat and blaming Bush for it, despite his 2011 statement. It's not rocket science.
1
The answer is: Bush and Obama talk a different game, but act the same. There's not a nickels worth of difference between them.
1
The Iraqi soldier who left for Europe, where it is safer,
exemplifies a real problem. He did not feel that he had to stay and
fight for his "country," because Iraq doesn't even feel
like a country anymore to many of its its battered citizens. But
there is not enough room in Europe for all the people who would
like to be safer there.
exemplifies a real problem. He did not feel that he had to stay and
fight for his "country," because Iraq doesn't even feel
like a country anymore to many of its its battered citizens. But
there is not enough room in Europe for all the people who would
like to be safer there.
Billions? I only wish it was "billions". Trillions.
Trillions of dollars, wasted or stolen. Squandered either way.
Meanwhile, the greatest mass extinction since the Permian–Triassic Extinction Event is underway; happening right under our very noses. Not that we seem to notice, let alone care. If anything is a super-national threat to us, it's that. Yet our collective response to this harbinger of doom is to hasten it along, by bombing jungles, polluting oceans, and building F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, or Su-25 "Frogfoot" bombers. "Defend the environment" is, at best, an empty abstraction.
At the rate species are disappearing -- being shot, poisoned, asphyxiated, starved, cut down, burned out and plowed under by us -- the only frogs on Planet Earth will be Russian close support combat aircraft.
Trillions of dollars, wasted or stolen. Squandered either way.
Meanwhile, the greatest mass extinction since the Permian–Triassic Extinction Event is underway; happening right under our very noses. Not that we seem to notice, let alone care. If anything is a super-national threat to us, it's that. Yet our collective response to this harbinger of doom is to hasten it along, by bombing jungles, polluting oceans, and building F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, or Su-25 "Frogfoot" bombers. "Defend the environment" is, at best, an empty abstraction.
At the rate species are disappearing -- being shot, poisoned, asphyxiated, starved, cut down, burned out and plowed under by us -- the only frogs on Planet Earth will be Russian close support combat aircraft.
3
Rand Paul isn't right about a lot of things but he is right about this.
1
Tragedy on tragedy, we have evidently learned nothing from the fiasco we created in invading Iraq. We are behaving like the colonial powers of old, recruiting other peoples to wreck havoc for us, but that strategy will just not work and longer if it ever actually worked 100 years and more ago.
1
Training can't fix a wrongheaded policy. We have no business being there.
Simon Jenkins put it best a few days ago.
"In the secure west, foreign policy has long been a branch of domestic politics, with added sermonizing.“What to do”, in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, even Ukraine, has been dictated not by what might work but what looks good. The megaphone is mightier than the brain.
……
Russia has accepted that the forcible toppling of Assad – which Britain has predicted since 2011 – is not a realistic path to peace. If he is to go, it will be after his enemies have been driven back, not before.
The true nature of the west’s commitment in Syria was revealed in Barack Obama’s remark to the UN that “because alternatives are surely worse” is no reason to support tyrants. In other words, American feelgood is more important than Syrian lives. That cosy maxim has guided western policy in the region for over a decade. It has been a disaster. If we have nothing more intelligent to say on Syria, we should listen to Putin. He has.”
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/29/west-vladmir-putin-...
Simon Jenkins put it best a few days ago.
"In the secure west, foreign policy has long been a branch of domestic politics, with added sermonizing.“What to do”, in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, even Ukraine, has been dictated not by what might work but what looks good. The megaphone is mightier than the brain.
……
Russia has accepted that the forcible toppling of Assad – which Britain has predicted since 2011 – is not a realistic path to peace. If he is to go, it will be after his enemies have been driven back, not before.
The true nature of the west’s commitment in Syria was revealed in Barack Obama’s remark to the UN that “because alternatives are surely worse” is no reason to support tyrants. In other words, American feelgood is more important than Syrian lives. That cosy maxim has guided western policy in the region for over a decade. It has been a disaster. If we have nothing more intelligent to say on Syria, we should listen to Putin. He has.”
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/29/west-vladmir-putin-...
4
Maybe someone could inform Obama that if you want something done right-do it yourself. There is ample evidence that training locals is ineffective. Trust your military leadership and your own troops to perform the task successfully.
1
Please explain why we would should send our own troops to fight a Syrian civil war.
Are the Russians getting more "bang for the Ruble" than we, for the Buck?
What does that suggest about American technology, planning, leadership, execution and flexibility?
What if we've underestimated Russia, and what if the Russians underestimate us?
Mutual stumbles may be funny in a circus. This is not a circus.
What does that suggest about American technology, planning, leadership, execution and flexibility?
What if we've underestimated Russia, and what if the Russians underestimate us?
Mutual stumbles may be funny in a circus. This is not a circus.
2
Who's most likely to put an END to wasting money on "training" foreign troops?
DONALD TRUMP.
If all the money pounded into the sand of Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. had been used HERE instead on education, infra-structure, etc., wouldn't we be better off? Is it too late?
DONALD TRUMP.
If all the money pounded into the sand of Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. had been used HERE instead on education, infra-structure, etc., wouldn't we be better off? Is it too late?
4
So just send your taxes in every year so idiots can waste our dollars.
4
Times readers, think about this.
Obama is so arrogant, so far out of touch with reality that he wanted to continue the Bush Doctrine but using the bodies and lives of Syrians, Afghans, etc to to America's fighting for the United States.
And Obama was glad to waste our money on such foolishness, while pretending to be an antiwar progressive liberal to get elected in 2008. If it was Obama's belief that Bush was dumb and these wars were dumb, he should have withdrawn ALL of our armed forces, told the American people the truth and lived with his choice to withdraw the USA from global leadership.
Instead Obama tried to have it both ways, he tried to play chickenhawk and peacenik.
Hilarious right?
Obama is so arrogant, so far out of touch with reality that he wanted to continue the Bush Doctrine but using the bodies and lives of Syrians, Afghans, etc to to America's fighting for the United States.
And Obama was glad to waste our money on such foolishness, while pretending to be an antiwar progressive liberal to get elected in 2008. If it was Obama's belief that Bush was dumb and these wars were dumb, he should have withdrawn ALL of our armed forces, told the American people the truth and lived with his choice to withdraw the USA from global leadership.
Instead Obama tried to have it both ways, he tried to play chickenhawk and peacenik.
Hilarious right?
7
"he should have withdrawn ALL of our armed forces, told the American people the truth and lived with his choice to withdraw the USA from global leadership."
Combat soldiers are out of Iraq, and we're leaving Afghanistan next year. You would prefer an immediate withdrawal (but not really, because you're in favor of the wars), which would be irresponsible.
What's hilarious is your faux outrage.
Combat soldiers are out of Iraq, and we're leaving Afghanistan next year. You would prefer an immediate withdrawal (but not really, because you're in favor of the wars), which would be irresponsible.
What's hilarious is your faux outrage.
If those folks want a better government and a better life they need to step up and fight for it themselves just like the American colonists did. They don't actually want a better government, however, they just want their sect to have more power than the other sect. NO MORE AMERICAN LIVES should be sacrificed for these hateful people! We better turn around and look in the opposite direction, at China...
5
There seems to be a lack of character in this culture. We see it time and time again. We see it in the recent migrants over 70% of whom are male. Many are young men who as one European leader said "look like they just came from the gym". I've seen interviews with some of these young men talking about wanting to go to Germany and Sweden not for opportunity and freedom but for higher benefits. Why aren't these able bodied young men fighting in their homelands for their families and for their freedom? Time and time again we see soldiers in the Middle East run away in battle. While Middle Eastern males have no problem gunning down unarmed cartoonists in France. I've read that Charity is a pillar of Islam yet wealthy Gulf states are taking in zero Syrian refugees. While much poorer European countries like Poland are expected to feed and house these "refugees" without complaint. I for one am tired of the excuses.Helping people who make no effort to help themselves is a waste of time, money and effort. Its time for it to end.
6
You sound like DONALD TRUMP.
Do you intend to vote for him? (I'm seriously considering it. Tired of all the waste when our own country is in such bad straits.)
Do you intend to vote for him? (I'm seriously considering it. Tired of all the waste when our own country is in such bad straits.)
2
Our economy would completely collapse without "WARfare", the subsidization of jobs that keep people working making bombs, guns and equipment we fully expect to have blown up as soon as it leaves the factories. What a waste. Bring our "real" jobs back here and stop defending our "national interests" in foreign countries where we exploit slave labor. In reality, it is costing us much more for supporting corporations that don't pay any taxes to support slavery.
13
Mr. Obama's "approach" has "already endured several setbacks."
Oh the NY Times, when will they stop covering the Obama WH?
Translation: Under Obama, the American people have lost billions if not trillions on a failed strategy top US military leaders have quit the military in protest of, and even Hillary Clinton is critical of Obama's surrender/lead from behind/throw money at it and hide strategy.
Oh the NY Times, when will they stop covering the Obama WH?
Translation: Under Obama, the American people have lost billions if not trillions on a failed strategy top US military leaders have quit the military in protest of, and even Hillary Clinton is critical of Obama's surrender/lead from behind/throw money at it and hide strategy.
2
Isn't that the lesson from the Vietnamese war? That local forces imposed from above by generally unpopular and corrupt governments can't survive once GI Joe leaves. I just came back from a trip to Vietnam and it's a pity Obama has likely never visited the war museum in Ho Chi Minh City. It's a testament to American stupidity as well as cruelty, and indeed war crimes. in a conflict they were bound to lose. All over the Middle East the US is repeating their old errors. A pity.
American-trained security forces also collapsed during the Bush Administration. What's new?
3
$ alone doesn't provide the MOST important ingredient GUTS/BRAVADO and MOTIVATION none of which arabs have a long history when facing well trained militaries of NOT possessing !
The whole ill fated scenario over there was a direct result of phony intelligence and Tony Blair's WMD nonesense costing thousands of American and allied forces lives !
If special forces and air raids had been instigated years back Western enemies would have been defeated by now !
The whole ill fated scenario over there was a direct result of phony intelligence and Tony Blair's WMD nonesense costing thousands of American and allied forces lives !
If special forces and air raids had been instigated years back Western enemies would have been defeated by now !
3
When you have countries 'split' by religious and tribal differences, you have to 'engineer' those differences (and constituencies) into your fighting force.
One of our leading generals (now retired) explained that the army has to represent all these different groups (from the top to the bottom) in order for the army to have a chance to function. When the political leaders placed their cronies into the army, the cohesion of the army began to fail and the downward spiral began.
The U.S. attempts at propping up governments and training their armed forces also has an extremely bad track record. Any student of history can tell you that we are not on the 'side of history' in these attempts yet we persist just like Don Quixote...
One of our leading generals (now retired) explained that the army has to represent all these different groups (from the top to the bottom) in order for the army to have a chance to function. When the political leaders placed their cronies into the army, the cohesion of the army began to fail and the downward spiral began.
The U.S. attempts at propping up governments and training their armed forces also has an extremely bad track record. Any student of history can tell you that we are not on the 'side of history' in these attempts yet we persist just like Don Quixote...
Why didn't the authors focus more on the training and arming the Kurds who have successfully fought ISIS and beat them to defend their homeland? The same with Shiite militias who also repelled ISIS invaders. Only when people have something they are willing to fight and die for should the US give military support. Also, why not try giving more economic and humanitarian aid? I often wonder what people would think if we spent the same amount of money air dropping food, books, water, and appropriate technologies, to directly help people survive, rather than dropping bombs. I do not mean the traditional NGO-based handouts where corruption and middle men take most of the aid.
So let me get this straight: we have spent billions, perhaps trillions, lost and wounded millions, and have been unable to adequately train our foreign "friends." Yet, we were unable to help Detroit avoid bankruptcy, and are turning our backs on Illinois, Kentucky and Puerto Rico during their time of need.
Wise policies.
Wise policies.
9
Thank you!!!
Typical Obama plan. Shell out money with no results..Just like Solindra, Evergreen solar and the rest. 16 months can't come soon enough. Get rid of these clown and the rest of the Democrats. Need someone to be accountable. To get results not talk about compassion. This country can't afford thee give aways anymore.
1
I served under Bush for many years mentoring and training nearby konduz. We knew we were in trouble already. Glad a democrat is going to take the blame on a Bush plan.
3
The country is far better off under Obama than GWB.
Facts are facts, sorry.
Facts are facts, sorry.
Obama is a con artist.
He campaigned and won the WH in 2008 promising to end Bush's policies and nation building. Obama took office and doubled down on all of Bush's policies, trying to use "trained rebel forces" to do the war stuff, squandering OUR billions.
He campaigned and won the WH in 2008 promising to end Bush's policies and nation building. Obama took office and doubled down on all of Bush's policies, trying to use "trained rebel forces" to do the war stuff, squandering OUR billions.
Gee, America can't remake the world in its own image, who would have thought.
Good old American Exceptionalism and the quest for empire will never die. Even after the examples of Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria it is comforting to know that the solution offered by both Hillary and the Republicans is to double down. Talk about repeating the same actions over and over while expecting a different result.
Remember, the bad guys hate us for our freedoms and wonderful way of life. It has nothing to do with wantonly destroying their homes, their families and their countries.
Dick Cheney was ( for once) right, "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality." We, the American people did this. We created this mess and our only solution is more of the same.
"We have met the enemy and it is us."
Good old American Exceptionalism and the quest for empire will never die. Even after the examples of Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria it is comforting to know that the solution offered by both Hillary and the Republicans is to double down. Talk about repeating the same actions over and over while expecting a different result.
Remember, the bad guys hate us for our freedoms and wonderful way of life. It has nothing to do with wantonly destroying their homes, their families and their countries.
Dick Cheney was ( for once) right, "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality." We, the American people did this. We created this mess and our only solution is more of the same.
"We have met the enemy and it is us."
3
The wealth of a nation, squandered on war.
5
The innocents being murdered in this fiasco are merely caught between the Sunni-Shiite schism that has been simmering ever since the battle of Karbala in 680 C.E. Perhaps it is time we recognized that the nonsensical political borders among middle eastern nations no longer exist but rather this has become a religious civil war.
Looking at this from a purely pragmatic view it seems to me that the actual enemy of the United States are the Saudi's and the gulf state monarchies. They provide the political, financial, and philosophical foundations for the Islamic State and international terrorist.
On the other hand, Iran has been fighting terrorism with terrorism ever since they overthrew the American backed dictatorship of the Shah. The Iranian leadership may shout "death to America" from the rooftops but they have excellent cause to do so considering that we installed the Shah over a democratically elected government in the name of cold war stability and have meddled in their affairs ever since. From a strategic perspective I believe a coalition of Russia, US, Iran, and the Kurds can effectively wipe out IS. Hopefully such a cooperative effort can sideline the Saudis while providing a political framework for having Mr. Assad removed from power once ISIS is defeated. At that point perhaps the Saudi regime can be held back from exporting their corrupted brand of Islam.
Looking at this from a purely pragmatic view it seems to me that the actual enemy of the United States are the Saudi's and the gulf state monarchies. They provide the political, financial, and philosophical foundations for the Islamic State and international terrorist.
On the other hand, Iran has been fighting terrorism with terrorism ever since they overthrew the American backed dictatorship of the Shah. The Iranian leadership may shout "death to America" from the rooftops but they have excellent cause to do so considering that we installed the Shah over a democratically elected government in the name of cold war stability and have meddled in their affairs ever since. From a strategic perspective I believe a coalition of Russia, US, Iran, and the Kurds can effectively wipe out IS. Hopefully such a cooperative effort can sideline the Saudis while providing a political framework for having Mr. Assad removed from power once ISIS is defeated. At that point perhaps the Saudi regime can be held back from exporting their corrupted brand of Islam.
3
America has it's own problems; we can't even pass a budget. We can't get a handle on immigration and mass shootings. For us to go around the world trying to solve the problems of others is kinda like the blind leading the blind....
4
This reminds me so much of the problems the US military had in trying to turn the South Vietnamese army into an effective military force. And 50 years later we still haven't learned.
6
Obama may have implemented this, but the republicans were all calling for this to be done also. They wanted the forces armed and trained. It's the same thing we did in Afghan and Iraq under Bush and see how well they are doing with far more money and training, which is not well at all. All that money down the toilet. None of them able to fight or it seems willing.
2
No, it was Bush implementing this. I was a trainer under bush in the early years of afghanistan and our objective is to leave and have these people trained. I didn't have faith in the Afghan because I thought it requires one full generation to pass before they realize culturally what they need to do.
2
Focus on USA. Enough already.
7
Americans are failing to volunteer for these wars. Foreigners are failing to volunteer. It is time to consider bringing back the draft. Requiring the able bodied young men of Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria to register is a small thing if they are to enjoy our freedoms.
1
A reasonable person would ask why the US is in these regions. The answer is oil. With fracing starting in the US, the need to be in the ME is much lessened. So why not withdraw?
1
Maybe we should study what Ghengis Khan would have done. After all, he managed to conquer Mesopotamia including Baghdad and things got real quiet after that. Of course, he didn't have to deal with the media or the UN or Amnesty International, either.
2
IMHO, this money would have been better spent weaning us off oil, at best a 19th century technology. Oil money fuels these conflicts. Where and who are funding these conflicts? Had we invested in renewables (i.e. free) energy maybe the world wouldn't be, by necessity, fueling terror strikes and war around the world.
But hey, no energy company wants free energy, do they?
But hey, no energy company wants free energy, do they?
1
We need to get out of any military involvement in remote sectarian parts of the planet. We have not been able to make any changes for the better in these wars, and in the meantime we are killing many of their citizens, destroying their infrastructure. and turning whole countries against us!
Now after destroying their cities and businesses will we have to spend the rest of our resources rebuilding their countries or importing whole populations to the US and housing and feeding them? This is a bad idea from start to finish.
It will not be easy to integrate strict Moslems into our more casual culture. There will be a lot of misunderstandings and conflict. As a women I have experienced the aggressive male Moslem behavior towards women in Southern France. It was not pleasant…
The only people who will benefit from these wars is the US military industrial complex. We, the American people, are paying to enrich the industrial war machine. It has become a very lucrative business so it will be hard to keep it in check. The longer the US keeps killing foreign citizens the harder it will be to stop this violence.
We all need to quiz all the US presidential candidates about their positions on sending our troops into other countries to fight these religious wars in the future. Remember to ask them they are getting campaign contributions from the military industrial war machine too!
Now after destroying their cities and businesses will we have to spend the rest of our resources rebuilding their countries or importing whole populations to the US and housing and feeding them? This is a bad idea from start to finish.
It will not be easy to integrate strict Moslems into our more casual culture. There will be a lot of misunderstandings and conflict. As a women I have experienced the aggressive male Moslem behavior towards women in Southern France. It was not pleasant…
The only people who will benefit from these wars is the US military industrial complex. We, the American people, are paying to enrich the industrial war machine. It has become a very lucrative business so it will be hard to keep it in check. The longer the US keeps killing foreign citizens the harder it will be to stop this violence.
We all need to quiz all the US presidential candidates about their positions on sending our troops into other countries to fight these religious wars in the future. Remember to ask them they are getting campaign contributions from the military industrial war machine too!
2
What can you expect from the American culture that thinks that answer to these problems are guns, drones and more firepower? Nonviolence and diplomacy was never high on the agenda. We are so immune to needless gun violence within our borders, and we definitely don't care about the life of folks in other countries. It's business as usual for most of the Americans and someone is definitely getting richer by earning all this Blood Money. It's perhaps Violence Without Borders.
6
Non-intervention maybe, but not non-violence.
1
Yeah well. If we weren't going to learn from Vietnam, we were never going to learn.
And clearly elections really do not matter. Obama--for whom I swear to God I voted twice--has been nothing but Bush Light. Hillary rattles the sabers as part of her campaign schtick; she may not sound as rabid as the Republicans but she is apparently just as willing to let other people*s kids get killed in useless wars, or be deprived of what they need and are--yes--entitled to in order to send billions down the toilet.
And Bernie has already made clear he will not risk miffing the Israel lobby, so do you expect he will be able to resist all involvement in proxy wars promulgated by Israel, covertly or overtly? Fat chance.
And I don't see the American public inundating our elected officials with enraged calls to end these follies, like, you know, yesterday...
And clearly elections really do not matter. Obama--for whom I swear to God I voted twice--has been nothing but Bush Light. Hillary rattles the sabers as part of her campaign schtick; she may not sound as rabid as the Republicans but she is apparently just as willing to let other people*s kids get killed in useless wars, or be deprived of what they need and are--yes--entitled to in order to send billions down the toilet.
And Bernie has already made clear he will not risk miffing the Israel lobby, so do you expect he will be able to resist all involvement in proxy wars promulgated by Israel, covertly or overtly? Fat chance.
And I don't see the American public inundating our elected officials with enraged calls to end these follies, like, you know, yesterday...
7
Excellent article. Thank you.
Why doesn't the US government ever get it that soldiers need something to fight for: A way of life, a country, a religion...something to inspire courage and dedication.
The best weapons and the best training and even the best leaders cannot replace that.
And yet, again and again, we back corrupt regimes in countries with no history of nationalism amid a background of religious strife. They have no tradition of democracy. Yet we stupidly believe they "must" want democracy.
So, what do these soldiers fight for? I couldn't figure it out in Vietnam and I can't figure it out a half century later. Neither can the Pentagon but they keep using the same failed playbook.
Insanity.
Why doesn't the US government ever get it that soldiers need something to fight for: A way of life, a country, a religion...something to inspire courage and dedication.
The best weapons and the best training and even the best leaders cannot replace that.
And yet, again and again, we back corrupt regimes in countries with no history of nationalism amid a background of religious strife. They have no tradition of democracy. Yet we stupidly believe they "must" want democracy.
So, what do these soldiers fight for? I couldn't figure it out in Vietnam and I can't figure it out a half century later. Neither can the Pentagon but they keep using the same failed playbook.
Insanity.
10
Here in a nutshell lies the answer why we should never vote for a commander-in-chief who hast not actively served in the military. Bush senior was the last competent CiC we have had. Clinton wisely did not wade into larger scale military adventures. Bush junior and Obama have been abyssmal failures. Short of a nuke in the hands of ISIS, how could the outcome have been worse?
3
I doubt anyone will sit down and read 574 comments all with a wide range of opinions and finger pointing from "W" for starting it all to Obama's strategy to train in country forces to kill fellow countrymen. Much like the "Vietnamisation " of the war in Vietnam. My problem is that we never seem to learn from our mistakes. We can't win this, the middle east countries will never be democracies as we know it. They have a tribal culture which we will never understand. We need to get out. Now.
My other problem is with the television media and the editorials in print. the Obama administration has spent $65 billion training Afghan forces to no avail. A complete failure of policy and strategy. He gets a pass by all print media, MSNBC, CBS, NBC and ABC. Why? If he were a Republican he would be the center of criticism night after night. Even the bombing of a hospital run by "Doctors Without Borders" gets "ho hum" coverage.
No wonder the electorate is fed up. I sincerely hope we get a change in 2016 in spite of the "disciples".
My other problem is with the television media and the editorials in print. the Obama administration has spent $65 billion training Afghan forces to no avail. A complete failure of policy and strategy. He gets a pass by all print media, MSNBC, CBS, NBC and ABC. Why? If he were a Republican he would be the center of criticism night after night. Even the bombing of a hospital run by "Doctors Without Borders" gets "ho hum" coverage.
No wonder the electorate is fed up. I sincerely hope we get a change in 2016 in spite of the "disciples".
2
This country should never do anything that the President isn't totally committed to. Some of us learned that lesson with the Bay of Pigs fiasco, and a whole new generation is learning it with this tawdry failure with foreign fighters.
Not to blame Mr. Obama here, but we'd have done tons better just hiring private citizens/ex-soldiers/operatives to go there with a minimum of gov't involvement other than cash.
Not to blame Mr. Obama here, but we'd have done tons better just hiring private citizens/ex-soldiers/operatives to go there with a minimum of gov't involvement other than cash.
4
OK, we have made a mess in the Middle East by getting rid of dictators and look what we have now. So we continue to bribe them with money that would be better used in our own country to take care of us. Stop the bribes, let them govern themselves and take care of our own for once.
Enough is enough. They hate us for what we have and they will continue to do so. Stop wasting money on them and put it in our own country
Enough is enough. They hate us for what we have and they will continue to do so. Stop wasting money on them and put it in our own country
4
Another unfortunate consequence of the military-industrial complex that rules the roost in Washington. What our "endangered" allies want is for us to act as mercenaries - guns for hire that will do the dirty work that they are disinclined to do for a host of reasons including, the wish to preserve their options and blame the presence of "outsiders" for the results. In 1961 retiring President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned America about the growing influence of the collaboration between the military establishment and arms manufacturers. It was a prophetic statement which has been ignored in Washington by Congress and Presidents.
3
Presumably, if these puppet armies had attained their military objectives while wiping out tens of thousands of people, this article would call it a triumph for American foreign policy.
The gap between horrified indignation over American deaths - as in the Oregon murders - and complete lack of concern about American-supported mass murders in other countries has been made sickeningly obvious in this newspaper's coverage this weekend. The Times, and its highly ethical commenters, show not the slightest interest in the value of human life.
The gap between horrified indignation over American deaths - as in the Oregon murders - and complete lack of concern about American-supported mass murders in other countries has been made sickeningly obvious in this newspaper's coverage this weekend. The Times, and its highly ethical commenters, show not the slightest interest in the value of human life.
1
If we cannot "pay" the citizenry of other countries enough to fight to defend themselves, and if we - or thy - cannot count on their homegrown armed forces to fight the fight and not drop their weapons and fade into the civilian crowds, and if we do not wish to fight for their freedoms instead of them... what, pray tell is left? Prayer? Philosophical discussion? Psychological counseling? Or articles like the one on which we're commenting?
1
If some substantial fraction of the hundreds of billions had been spent on schools, hospitals and sewer systems, I bet we would have had many more friends in that part of the world whom we could influence. As of now, we are deluding ourselves if we think forces trained by the U.S.could bring about resolution of the conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria.
2
But the good news is that U.S. military contractors made lots of money!
5
I believe that those are all private citizens, so you can be proud of them. This isn't like that word that makes liberals' heads explode, Haliburton.
Note the American-trained Iraqi deserter in Germany. Undoubtedly a poor, persecuted refugee.
They show up because you PAY them to show up. But, what cause are they willing to die for? Hint: not ours.
It is amazing that such senior gov't and military officials can be this clueless.
It is amazing that such senior gov't and military officials can be this clueless.
2
The article and most of the current comments all speak to one outstanding factor. That is - one culture trying to impose its culture on another group. The illustrations given such as Viet Nam, Middle East countries, Africa show that our military is working at cross purposes with groups that do not have the same objectives - so when we leave, they go home. It is not an issue of good or bad objectives, just different ones. We never learn.
1
When are we going to get it through our thick skulls that everybody else in the world does not necessarily want the same things that we want, do not see things the way we see them. They don't have the same values, they don't have the same mores, they don't have the same ambition(s) we do.
3
Apart from faulty intelligence and possibly faulty policy, I wonder just how much of the money ends up in numbered bank accounts in Switzerland, in the Cayman Islands, or even invested in New York real estate.
Is there any competent process for determining how the money we spend is actually used and, if so, what does it show?
It's one thing to buy the allegiance of a people. It is another thing to buy the allegiance of a leader who the people may well dump.
Is there any competent process for determining how the money we spend is actually used and, if so, what does it show?
It's one thing to buy the allegiance of a people. It is another thing to buy the allegiance of a leader who the people may well dump.
5
With over fifty years of evidence the failure of this model of American training of foreign forces is abundantly clear. Just as America could not cork corruption and ineptitude in the South Vietnamese Army, we see the all too familiar dismal end state in both Iraq and Afghanistan. It's one thing to train an individual soldier on the banality of a firing range, it is quite another to train an army's leaders to master the science of logistics and coordinate combined operations in both the chaotic and dynamic environments of combat to achieve tactical and strategic objectives.
Only in the so-called DC think tanks awash in money from defense contractors and Israel are these odious weeds of thought like, "we will be greeted as liberators," "democracy-in-a-box" and "nation building," allowed to persist. Just look at the Pandora's box all of those efforts have yielded in the Middle East. Although, Clausewitz said it best that war is politics by other means, the imperialism touted by the Neo Cons cannot be forced upon anyone.
Only in the so-called DC think tanks awash in money from defense contractors and Israel are these odious weeds of thought like, "we will be greeted as liberators," "democracy-in-a-box" and "nation building," allowed to persist. Just look at the Pandora's box all of those efforts have yielded in the Middle East. Although, Clausewitz said it best that war is politics by other means, the imperialism touted by the Neo Cons cannot be forced upon anyone.
4
I believe that Vietnam ended because it was a war fueled by the draft- a nonvoluntary military. Then we went to a voluntary army and blundered, yes blundered, through Iraq and Afghanistan. The all voluntary army, consisting of fat kids from poor counties led by a few of our state U equivalent military colleges, bolstered by a sophisticated propaganda machine ("our military heroes"- bow to them at the airport and every damn college football game) has failed. Israel has it right. EVERYBODY is in the military for 3 years- smart kids who will be going to Ivy league schools and UVa and Berkeley and Michigan and Duke and Vanderbilt and Stanford will be your lieutenants for 3 years and watching your otherwise stupid decisions, and speaking up and writing it all down. The US Army, particularly, couldn't handle this internal scrutiny. Thank you John Kerry for speaking up as you did, and showing the way.
8
We are literally training the enemy.
Even the concept of a country is foreign to the middle east....not one you would want to fight for anyway.
You fight for your religious sect over there...and blame the USA for everything.
Even the concept of a country is foreign to the middle east....not one you would want to fight for anyway.
You fight for your religious sect over there...and blame the USA for everything.
3
If hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of young Muslim men will not fight for their own countries, why should Americans again?
5
I know Winston Churchill said "he did not become Prime Minister to preside over the dissolution of the British Empire," however, look at the UK a world leader in culture, biosciences, diplomacy, stability - I think we could do worse then to retrench, regroup, and focus on our roads, our bridges, our kids, our seniors, our tourism. Let's give it up. Hand it over to China,Russia, whoever wants it. WE've done our turn as world leaders; we annot afford it anymore and to preserve our moral leadership, we have to just let go and let others carry the heavy burden, and I think we will be pleasantly surprised at where we end up. I mean, let's shed all these bases overseas too, and let's stop patrolling the international seas. If anyone has been to Canada lately, you'd discover pharamaceuticals available at 50% of US prices, you'd find amazing roads and bridges all toll-free, low gun violance, and a thriving economy in a lot of areas/industries. And they are happy, very happy people. Please, America, let's succomb to lesser than world leader status, please.
1
Honestly, talk about how to miss a point:
1. There never was an "Iraq". The whole country is an invention of the West, after WW1, courtesy of Shell and BP.
2. Thanks to Zaqawi, the Sunni/Shia split in the region is wider than ever. They won't help each other. The Shia will be quite content to let the Sunni exterminate themselves.
3. The Kurds, fighting for their homeland, are effective. These collections of unpaid lost souls, with little or no combat experience and no motivation, are no threat to anyone except whoever makes policy.
4. The "boots on the ground" theory just makes targets. It's ridiculous, expensive and unnecessary in so many ways. You don't need boots on the ground forever or even for a week, just where and when needed, then back to base.
5. The saying goes - If you want something done...?
The thinking is very different in these parts of the world. To give an example - A few years ago, the Pakistani military conducted a major offensive in Pashtun territory against the Taliban. It was quite successful, with only a few casualties. I asked a Pakistani friend why there were so few, to be told "They were Pashtun troops". The Pashtun, in effect, had asked the Taliban to leave. Meanwhile, Taliban recruits said that joining the Taliban was the only local work available. Sound familiar?
Forget "hearts and minds", which has never worked, cash giveaways, and trusting those who can't be trusted to do anything but take the money and run. THINK.
1. There never was an "Iraq". The whole country is an invention of the West, after WW1, courtesy of Shell and BP.
2. Thanks to Zaqawi, the Sunni/Shia split in the region is wider than ever. They won't help each other. The Shia will be quite content to let the Sunni exterminate themselves.
3. The Kurds, fighting for their homeland, are effective. These collections of unpaid lost souls, with little or no combat experience and no motivation, are no threat to anyone except whoever makes policy.
4. The "boots on the ground" theory just makes targets. It's ridiculous, expensive and unnecessary in so many ways. You don't need boots on the ground forever or even for a week, just where and when needed, then back to base.
5. The saying goes - If you want something done...?
The thinking is very different in these parts of the world. To give an example - A few years ago, the Pakistani military conducted a major offensive in Pashtun territory against the Taliban. It was quite successful, with only a few casualties. I asked a Pakistani friend why there were so few, to be told "They were Pashtun troops". The Pashtun, in effect, had asked the Taliban to leave. Meanwhile, Taliban recruits said that joining the Taliban was the only local work available. Sound familiar?
Forget "hearts and minds", which has never worked, cash giveaways, and trusting those who can't be trusted to do anything but take the money and run. THINK.
5
If you don't learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it. Vietnamization was Nixon's attempt at the same thing. And, it took the North Vietnamese only two years to change the name of Saigon to Ho Chi Minh City.
3
How soon we forget. I was in Saigon after the US troops left and before the final collapse. Anybody who was on the ground realised that there was zero will to fight, not altogether the Vietnamese military's fault since the US had had a totally dismissive attitude towards them. At the same time those who were meant to be providing realistic analysis kept on giving rosy estimates. Shouldn't some of the people doing this today in Iraq and Afghanistan be held responsible?
2
"Billions From U.S. Fail to Sustain Foreign Forces" > well over 90% of these 'billions' are actually US-corporate welfare. A small fraction of these 'billions' used in the proper way, ie infrastructure, economic, educational, etc would create a much safer environment for all. But our purpose is corporate welfare, which, like the war on drug and the war on terror, is an unending .
7
a very well written article. I appreciate the work that went into researching it, and the skills of the writers to communicate the points clearly.
Thank you
Thank you
1
As one of the richest countries in the world, one with no military draft, and a giant military-industrial defense complex, supported by Dr. Strangelove-type characters at the Pentagon, along with their Washington, DC based counterpart as both lobbyists and members of Congress, this political eco-system is self-supporting. Our foreign-policy initiatives come down to 2 elements: supplying guns and money to countries we want to influence, be it in Egypt, Iraq, or Afghanistan. Once there, we either support corrupt governments, or attempt to train combat-ready soldiers, but the locals are only there for the paycheck. They don't believe in the cause, or in their benefactor, America. They have no will-to-fight, no force-cohesion, or any esprit-de-corp, and readily disband and desert in the face of any extended fighting.
Astonishingly, we keep attempting to do this in Muslim countries, where the entire culture is against any infidels being in their countries, and especially one known as "the Great Satan". They embrace certain aspects of American popular culture, but they don't embrace Christianity, or democracy. So we keep attempting to do the same thing over and over again, using our failed guns and money strategies to effect change in these countries, all the while giving their extremist elements more and better reasons to recruit others to their causes. In the process, we spend trillions of taxpayer dollar over the course of decades with this madness.
8
we also trained the Taliban (remember Ronnie vs th communist threat to afganistan)
but we do keep all those valuable arms companies in business
just imagine if we had bought the country, and sent schools over
or better yet if we had schools in OUR country
but we do keep all those valuable arms companies in business
just imagine if we had bought the country, and sent schools over
or better yet if we had schools in OUR country
2
The Amsterdam, NY YMCA is closing after 158 years of service. Lack of funds. They need maybe $50K/yr to keep going. This is just one tiny example of what is wrong with our country today. Billions thrown away in the Middle East, but no funding for the local YMCA. Who can I vote for to turn this country around???
9
Why must we try and try again to force our alien ideas upon people who don't care about anything but the bribes and materials they can sell on the black market. We've tried it over and over and it never has worked "the way we expected." "When will we ever learn... oh, when will we ever learn?"
2
This is a political decision not an economic one. It's a lot harder to justify American lives lost in those places than billions spent "training" local forces.
2
The word of the day is "vacuum." As in "power vacuum" and "leadership vacuum."
We would never have pulled out of Iraq so early if there were not all kinds of promises made in the last 2 election cycles because our success after WWIII was predicated on us keeping a presence in Germany and Japan for decades. People need peace and tranquility for a long time before the new normal is normal. Our failures post WWII look just like Iraq.
It's easier for our politicians to give out billions and trillions of dollars then it is to dedicate the manpower to stabilize a country. They can't sell any vision other than cut and run and write out checks. I get it but are the so self-unaware that they don't understand that they are going to fail? And where are all these smart career politicians, military and State Department employees who should know this?
Maybe a few less rounds of golf and dinners and more time mediating on the world around us would help. We are way overpaying for the federal government we have in place now.
We would never have pulled out of Iraq so early if there were not all kinds of promises made in the last 2 election cycles because our success after WWIII was predicated on us keeping a presence in Germany and Japan for decades. People need peace and tranquility for a long time before the new normal is normal. Our failures post WWII look just like Iraq.
It's easier for our politicians to give out billions and trillions of dollars then it is to dedicate the manpower to stabilize a country. They can't sell any vision other than cut and run and write out checks. I get it but are the so self-unaware that they don't understand that they are going to fail? And where are all these smart career politicians, military and State Department employees who should know this?
Maybe a few less rounds of golf and dinners and more time mediating on the world around us would help. We are way overpaying for the federal government we have in place now.
5
@TSK: Interesting 'slip: "after WWIII was predicated on us keeping a presence in Germany and Japan for decades. " We are now in WWIII; I think you meant WWII ;-))
The problem of most of our wars since WWII is that they are not defensive but intrusionist. Even Afghanistan was misguided. We were dealing with a disabled leader who simply was living up to his cultural imperative of 'protecting' his guest. If we had shared evidence about OBL's role in the attacks on the WTC they would definitely have handed him over. In our rush to satisfy our 'hurt and anger' and to 'show them' we went to an unwinable war unless we used nukes to destroy the country. Moral of the situation: Go in all guns blasting [incl the nuke option]. Or stay out.
The problem of most of our wars since WWII is that they are not defensive but intrusionist. Even Afghanistan was misguided. We were dealing with a disabled leader who simply was living up to his cultural imperative of 'protecting' his guest. If we had shared evidence about OBL's role in the attacks on the WTC they would definitely have handed him over. In our rush to satisfy our 'hurt and anger' and to 'show them' we went to an unwinable war unless we used nukes to destroy the country. Moral of the situation: Go in all guns blasting [incl the nuke option]. Or stay out.
There are many voices suggesting a hands off or walk away, or look away strategy. It's as mistaken as the one described in the article.
If we just stay away, our interests will suffer, first political, then, most importantly, economic. With losing political influence we'll start losing our global market share, and that will hurt.
A good alternative strategy is being practiced by Putin: he NEVER bites more than he can swallow AND he makes sure no one swallows what he's taken a bite off. His saliva infuses its poison through the whole piece.
The limit to Putin's success is in lack of effective alliances; isolated from the West and particularly embraced by the East.
Imagine how effectively Putin's strategy could work for the US in alliance with EU with a tacit at least approval of Indo-China.
If we just stay away, our interests will suffer, first political, then, most importantly, economic. With losing political influence we'll start losing our global market share, and that will hurt.
A good alternative strategy is being practiced by Putin: he NEVER bites more than he can swallow AND he makes sure no one swallows what he's taken a bite off. His saliva infuses its poison through the whole piece.
The limit to Putin's success is in lack of effective alliances; isolated from the West and particularly embraced by the East.
Imagine how effectively Putin's strategy could work for the US in alliance with EU with a tacit at least approval of Indo-China.
2
It is hardly a phenom peculiar to Obama, that the billions that US pours into foreign forces are pretty much in vain. Long ago, we have told ourselves that we are not going to go into the nation-building business, but we forgot to tell Bush & Co. that we shouldn't go into pulling down someone else's government either (however much disdain we have toward those government leaders), and we forget to tell Obama too that same line of logic too. Saddam Hussein was exhibit A from Bush era, but Assad in Syria is the exhibit A, courtesy of Obama.
We should be ashamed of ourselves to have Putin coming to our rescue, of his willingness to engage ISIS and Taliban, even if that means assisting and propping up Assad during the process. Those radical muslim groups know full well that americans will not bring in group troops anymore, and air strike is never going to rid them, never mind defeating them. All they need to do, is to play the long game, because US simply does not have the staying power. Speaking of staying power, neither does Russians have it either. The only one who is truly going to stay, is Assad, like it or not.
US (politicians and voters) are being naive in thinking people-power like arab spring will solve all ills because none of those ethnic groups want to share power which is so necessary in a true democracy. Neither should anyone pull down existing government without any meaningful alternative. The South Africa model is what they need, as Mandela has shown us all.
We should be ashamed of ourselves to have Putin coming to our rescue, of his willingness to engage ISIS and Taliban, even if that means assisting and propping up Assad during the process. Those radical muslim groups know full well that americans will not bring in group troops anymore, and air strike is never going to rid them, never mind defeating them. All they need to do, is to play the long game, because US simply does not have the staying power. Speaking of staying power, neither does Russians have it either. The only one who is truly going to stay, is Assad, like it or not.
US (politicians and voters) are being naive in thinking people-power like arab spring will solve all ills because none of those ethnic groups want to share power which is so necessary in a true democracy. Neither should anyone pull down existing government without any meaningful alternative. The South Africa model is what they need, as Mandela has shown us all.
2
Let me think: fighting off the chinese communists, regime change, setting up a democratic government failed in VeetNam. Fighting off the Saddam dictatorship, regime change, setting up a democratic government failed in Iraq. Fighting off the Taliban, regime change, setting up a democratic government failed in Afghanistan (though we're not quite done failing there). So, I have a new Idea: let's fight off the Islamic terrorists in Syria, regime change (this time against the Russians), and set up a democratic government in Syria- Great New Idea. I totally support the Obama Plan- let the Russians have the educational experience this time, if they didn't learn it themselves in Afghanistan.
6
A billion here, $25 billion there and $65 billion over there...pretty soon you're talking about real money!
One can only speculate on what that amount of money could have done to improve our deteriorating educational system and decaying infrastructure.
One can only speculate on what that amount of money could have done to improve our deteriorating educational system and decaying infrastructure.
35
let's talk money, where is the 50 billion? in whose pocket? the us just throws 50 billon into the air and see where it lands? our tax money ends with iss and taliban thru their shared beliefs to whom we give support? tedp, you have made things much more clear. too bad most americans cannot read or write and have no knowledge of history
Based on the Democrats treatment of Obama, the rule seems to be that a sitting president (Obama) making decision after decision on a daily basis still gets to blame the past president (Bush) for a full 8 years. Therefore, when the next president finally gets here in '16 I can finally look forward to 8 years worth of well-earned blame on Obama's head for a bumbling foreign policy rooted in the fantasy of failed training programs. Right?
2
With out Bush invading two countries, we wouldn't have this mess. Just like JFK and LBJ got us into vietnam, Bush got us into trouble. There were those of us warning that this would be more vietnams, so yes Bush desires the blame.
Oh those training programs were started under Bush, the troops in Iraq and Afghan were trained by Bush and they fell apart. The republicans clambered for these failed fantasy training programs. They got what they wanted. So it wasn't just Obama and his failure, congress funded these programs.
Oh those training programs were started under Bush, the troops in Iraq and Afghan were trained by Bush and they fell apart. The republicans clambered for these failed fantasy training programs. They got what they wanted. So it wasn't just Obama and his failure, congress funded these programs.
"The United States is now relying largely on a Saudi-led air campaign that has caused more than 1,000 civilian casualties."
If only our role were so passive. We provide the Saudis with weapons, training, and targeting intelligence. The blood of Yemen civilians is not only on Saudi hands.
Meanwhile in Syria, the Saudis fund the Army of Conquest, a militant Islamist group tied to al Qaeda, which has acquired U.S. supplied weapons from the "moderate forces" we train and arm. Brilliant.
If only our role were so passive. We provide the Saudis with weapons, training, and targeting intelligence. The blood of Yemen civilians is not only on Saudi hands.
Meanwhile in Syria, the Saudis fund the Army of Conquest, a militant Islamist group tied to al Qaeda, which has acquired U.S. supplied weapons from the "moderate forces" we train and arm. Brilliant.
5
With alarming frequency in recent years, thousands of American-trained security forces in the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia have collapsed, stalled or defected....
[ Astonishing but obviously correct assertion and American leaders appear to have no idea at all why this is so and how to correct the repetitive occurrences or just change our foreign policy entirely. We have had a truly irrational foreign policy since the invasion of Iraq. ]
[ Astonishing but obviously correct assertion and American leaders appear to have no idea at all why this is so and how to correct the repetitive occurrences or just change our foreign policy entirely. We have had a truly irrational foreign policy since the invasion of Iraq. ]
1
Gee, these trainees must be victims of some kind. Let's open our borders and welcome them with open arms. Not.
2
Protect the Pedophiles! Look the other way, after offenders are our allies bringing order to this other culture. One need look no farther to explain this problem of no return on our money, as our "leaders" complain. It also demonstrates the control of big oil and protection of their profits.
1
In the Mid East we are making the same mistake we made in Vietnam. We are assuming that our enemies are unpopular with the local population, and that the local population welcomes our presence.
The only people we should give military support to anywhere in the world are people who tell us, "We will fight our enemies. We will welcome your assistance. Nevertheless, we will fight our enemies without your assistance if we need to."
Israel has told us that. No group of Muslims has.
The only people we should give military support to anywhere in the world are people who tell us, "We will fight our enemies. We will welcome your assistance. Nevertheless, we will fight our enemies without your assistance if we need to."
Israel has told us that. No group of Muslims has.
5
Apparently the Arabs really don't like foreigners. They do like our money, but when that stops flowing they go back to their way of living. And it has nothing to do with our way of living. American exceptionalism doesn't translate in Arabic or Pashto or Dari. Our response to 9-11 was as stupid as Bush and Congress were. Unfortunately Obama had no easy way out and now his legacy is entwined with that of G.W. Bush, and that's a shame.
20
I can't imagine what Obama hears at the table with his highest military advisors. The self interest of generals, military contractors, and private high paid civilians are speaking to Obama in concert.
A politician friend of mine in Virginia surmises this: that al the available top level generals and contractors met with the president the morning after his election and told him to defer to hostile military "to us", until he could get up to speed on Internet international relations. The relationship seems to have continued.
Obama is likable , intelligent; and I voted for him in his first term, meanwhile a little voice in my said "he's not qualified". He has to do something- in the relay race, bush passes the baton to O, and he in turn will pass it to Hillary "Hawk" Clinton. The "buck stops here"- wasn't that Truman's placard on his desk? Pres. Obama, history may not treat you well. You must break the cycle of all our failed wars
A politician friend of mine in Virginia surmises this: that al the available top level generals and contractors met with the president the morning after his election and told him to defer to hostile military "to us", until he could get up to speed on Internet international relations. The relationship seems to have continued.
Obama is likable , intelligent; and I voted for him in his first term, meanwhile a little voice in my said "he's not qualified". He has to do something- in the relay race, bush passes the baton to O, and he in turn will pass it to Hillary "Hawk" Clinton. The "buck stops here"- wasn't that Truman's placard on his desk? Pres. Obama, history may not treat you well. You must break the cycle of all our failed wars
1
Those last two paragraphs state the obvious. Now,
$500 million generated five fighters. Five! That reminds me of Forrest Gump when he starts his shrimping business and goes out on his first shrimp-catching venture and that old black man greets him upon his return and Forrest, bummed out, says, "I only caught five." And the black man looks at him and says, "Couple more you can have yourself a cocktail."
(The quantity of casualties the Saudis have inflicted via their bombing raids in Yemen is grotesquely high. There has been outrage about it, but not enough. They evidently do not care how many civilians they slaughter in pursuit of their goals.) Trying to mold distant parts of the world is always tough going. It's not easy to force-fit an inclusive vision onto a sectarian landscape. No one thinks Syria is going to come out of the war looking like Denmark. Obama talks about America's "primary interests." Do those interests include Islamic State overrunning huge swaths of two countries and multiplying globally via affiliates?
Who in their right mind thinks we need Iraq War troop levels to achieve our ends? We cannot run away from this. We can try to change minds; we can use coercion from afar; but that does not always work. And proxies, as we see, do not always work. In Syria, here's what I think: Assad must go and Islamic State must be destroyed, whatever it takes to accomplish BOTH objectives.
Delta Force, SEALs, and Predator drones cannot do everything.
$500 million generated five fighters. Five! That reminds me of Forrest Gump when he starts his shrimping business and goes out on his first shrimp-catching venture and that old black man greets him upon his return and Forrest, bummed out, says, "I only caught five." And the black man looks at him and says, "Couple more you can have yourself a cocktail."
(The quantity of casualties the Saudis have inflicted via their bombing raids in Yemen is grotesquely high. There has been outrage about it, but not enough. They evidently do not care how many civilians they slaughter in pursuit of their goals.) Trying to mold distant parts of the world is always tough going. It's not easy to force-fit an inclusive vision onto a sectarian landscape. No one thinks Syria is going to come out of the war looking like Denmark. Obama talks about America's "primary interests." Do those interests include Islamic State overrunning huge swaths of two countries and multiplying globally via affiliates?
Who in their right mind thinks we need Iraq War troop levels to achieve our ends? We cannot run away from this. We can try to change minds; we can use coercion from afar; but that does not always work. And proxies, as we see, do not always work. In Syria, here's what I think: Assad must go and Islamic State must be destroyed, whatever it takes to accomplish BOTH objectives.
Delta Force, SEALs, and Predator drones cannot do everything.
1
Delta Force, SEALS, and Predator drones can do one thing, kill innocent people, time and again.
As the sun sets on US hegemony the US has given a priceless lesson on the folly of imperialism to the Chinese regime. This will pay dividends later this century.
3
Why does the Times claim that this failure brings Obama's approach into question? It isn't just Obama, but rather a long tradition of war-by-proxy that has to be questioned.
And the answer is: "No, it doesn't work." Training and paying others to fight to the death is not the role of a great democracy.
And the answer is: "No, it doesn't work." Training and paying others to fight to the death is not the role of a great democracy.
2
America is the biggest threat to the world. We have destabilized the world because of a few people. Americans should have woken up years ago. Face it Americans both parties are owned by the neocons. All you have to do is look at the way Obama and Bush speak. Obama is all about the leader must go just like Bush did when told Sadaam Hussein must go. We should have been building up nations through friendship not destroying them.
7
What makes "us" think we have anything to teach, lead, train. We don't do too well at home. Hello? Seems to me we just beef up people's stock portfolios with sale of equipment. Seems to me we're pretty brazen and stupid.
6
The naivete and ignorance of the Bush/Cheney Administration, and its attendant cabals such as the NeoCons, to spread the concept of Democracy across the Middle East and other close environs is coming back to haunt us.
Leave the areas under review alone and how they may or may not come home is entirely up to them.
Certain character weaknesses of the male population in the areas under review is obvious as they all, for the most part, have other priorities.
Loyalty is to sect, tribe, religious beliefs, and not to defined Country areas or to governing elements in those Countries - no matter how the government is established.
Uniting Sunni and Shiite elements is a fool's errand in any locale.
The time has come for this country to pull the military plug on all military efforts of any kind.
We will take part in all diplomatic efforts in any and all forums.
But that is IT.
Leave the areas under review alone and how they may or may not come home is entirely up to them.
Certain character weaknesses of the male population in the areas under review is obvious as they all, for the most part, have other priorities.
Loyalty is to sect, tribe, religious beliefs, and not to defined Country areas or to governing elements in those Countries - no matter how the government is established.
Uniting Sunni and Shiite elements is a fool's errand in any locale.
The time has come for this country to pull the military plug on all military efforts of any kind.
We will take part in all diplomatic efforts in any and all forums.
But that is IT.
4
When the definitive history of American foreign policy finally comes to be written, it will be seen that our involvement in the Middle East, (not to mention Vietnam) over the past several decades has been the most counter-productive in the whole of western history.
Four trillion dollars could have put a million-volume library (for those who care about such matters) on every town square in America, and might even have made our educational system less embarrassing than it is. Instead, we burnt that amount along with tens of thousands of human beings, not excluding many of our own. Today, the Middle East is in infinitely worse condition than before we started. A self-respecting people would have rebelled by now and overthrown the leadership that believes that people are fungible, and that all societies are obliged to be just like us.
Tito Perdue
author
Four trillion dollars could have put a million-volume library (for those who care about such matters) on every town square in America, and might even have made our educational system less embarrassing than it is. Instead, we burnt that amount along with tens of thousands of human beings, not excluding many of our own. Today, the Middle East is in infinitely worse condition than before we started. A self-respecting people would have rebelled by now and overthrown the leadership that believes that people are fungible, and that all societies are obliged to be just like us.
Tito Perdue
author
2
these wars have been a big, misguided, jobs program. With no residual infrastructure but more wars.
George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Wolfowitz et al thank you for YOUR Vietnam legacy.
4
Armchair fighters, one and all.
The reason for America failure lies in the following three lines from the article: “… But after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, that mission jumped in ambition and scale, especially in Afghanistan and Iraq, where the ultimate goal was to replace the large American armies deployed there.”
.
America had occupied Iraq and Afghanistan, but the natives were not ready to give up their FREEDOMS and accept OCCUPIER DIKTAT. America did not want to accept even the low death rates of its own solders, which was the price of occupation. So a plot was hatched to get the COLLABORATING AFGHANS (just like the Vichy French, during WW2) to act as agents of the occupiers. Like the French before them, the Afghans also accepted the “Judas” role assigned to them.
However, there is a flow in this line of thinking, for the heart and spirit of the occupied populations was not in killing their own people. America tried psychology and bribery in its effort to create issues like Sunni-Sunni hatreds. Note: under Saddam Hussein such friction never interfered in the affairs of state in Iraq; in Afghanistan, sectarian issues (Shia-Sunni) never influenced the affairs of state under Zahir Shah, or under the Communist regime, or under the Islamic Republic rule.
In a way, the human race should all rejoice, at the failure of American efforts to BUY loyalty; Loyalty should be to Lofty ideas like Nation, like Family, like Way-of-Life and not become a purchasable commodity.
.
America had occupied Iraq and Afghanistan, but the natives were not ready to give up their FREEDOMS and accept OCCUPIER DIKTAT. America did not want to accept even the low death rates of its own solders, which was the price of occupation. So a plot was hatched to get the COLLABORATING AFGHANS (just like the Vichy French, during WW2) to act as agents of the occupiers. Like the French before them, the Afghans also accepted the “Judas” role assigned to them.
However, there is a flow in this line of thinking, for the heart and spirit of the occupied populations was not in killing their own people. America tried psychology and bribery in its effort to create issues like Sunni-Sunni hatreds. Note: under Saddam Hussein such friction never interfered in the affairs of state in Iraq; in Afghanistan, sectarian issues (Shia-Sunni) never influenced the affairs of state under Zahir Shah, or under the Communist regime, or under the Islamic Republic rule.
In a way, the human race should all rejoice, at the failure of American efforts to BUY loyalty; Loyalty should be to Lofty ideas like Nation, like Family, like Way-of-Life and not become a purchasable commodity.
"The push to rebuild the Iraqi Army ... had largely succeeded"
Obviously not. A successfully rebuilt army doesn't drop its weapons and run at the first taste of serious combat. The rebuilding effort succeeded in one place only, the positive reports and Powerpoint presentations made by departing US general Whathisname and his team as they rotated back to the US to get their commendations and medals and promotions. If general Whatsis and his team told the truth they would not get the commendations, medals, and promotions, so they do what all career men do in the face of unpleasant reality, they accentuate the positive (lie).
Iraq is a mess. The US lost the day we entered that country way back when and we can't fix our mistake in any reasonable way. Democrats can't say that because Republicans. Republicans can't say that because then they would have to own it. Congress can't fix it because they are really busy working on Benghazi, Emailgate, defunding Planned Parenthood, and making calls to contributors to their next campaign.
Obviously not. A successfully rebuilt army doesn't drop its weapons and run at the first taste of serious combat. The rebuilding effort succeeded in one place only, the positive reports and Powerpoint presentations made by departing US general Whathisname and his team as they rotated back to the US to get their commendations and medals and promotions. If general Whatsis and his team told the truth they would not get the commendations, medals, and promotions, so they do what all career men do in the face of unpleasant reality, they accentuate the positive (lie).
Iraq is a mess. The US lost the day we entered that country way back when and we can't fix our mistake in any reasonable way. Democrats can't say that because Republicans. Republicans can't say that because then they would have to own it. Congress can't fix it because they are really busy working on Benghazi, Emailgate, defunding Planned Parenthood, and making calls to contributors to their next campaign.
3
This is a glaring case of bi-partisan deafness and blindness combined with bluster and eloquence.
You can train people to be the toughest fighters in the world, but they will fight only as tough as strong the reason is for them to put their lives on the line.
Why is it so hard for our officials to understand that people in different countries, or sometimes different populations within the same country have different sets of values?
Just travel once beyond the Western civilization and you'll meet people, who see very little value in democracy, for example. They'll pay lip service and nod at the words 'freedom' 'representation' 'self-governance,' but live among them a while, and you'll find out that other values are far more fundamental to them. You want them to fight hard? Place them in a situation, where they will be forced to fight for THEIR values.
Practical solution to Syria? There are two:
1. Arm well and support ISIS, let them completely overrun Syria, while kicking them out of Iraq. Let them establish a state in Syria, and then obliterate it completely with scorch earth tactics.
or
2. Get the heck out and let Russia, Iran, and Assad finish their job. Concentrate instead on making sure that Russia/Iran's influence does not spill beyond Syria, while establishing an overwhelming military and economic presence In Ukraine.
You can train people to be the toughest fighters in the world, but they will fight only as tough as strong the reason is for them to put their lives on the line.
Why is it so hard for our officials to understand that people in different countries, or sometimes different populations within the same country have different sets of values?
Just travel once beyond the Western civilization and you'll meet people, who see very little value in democracy, for example. They'll pay lip service and nod at the words 'freedom' 'representation' 'self-governance,' but live among them a while, and you'll find out that other values are far more fundamental to them. You want them to fight hard? Place them in a situation, where they will be forced to fight for THEIR values.
Practical solution to Syria? There are two:
1. Arm well and support ISIS, let them completely overrun Syria, while kicking them out of Iraq. Let them establish a state in Syria, and then obliterate it completely with scorch earth tactics.
or
2. Get the heck out and let Russia, Iran, and Assad finish their job. Concentrate instead on making sure that Russia/Iran's influence does not spill beyond Syria, while establishing an overwhelming military and economic presence In Ukraine.
1
So in the exodus to Europe by refugees from war there are many men trained to be soldiers in that war. They are Iraqi as well as Syrian, and both Sunni and Shia are represented. They had no will to fight the battles chosen for them because those battles made no sense in terms of their beliefs and values. That doesn't make them pacifists, or uncommitted.
The reporting on refugees is wishful thinking: middle class Syrians, young workers to support aging Europeans, etc. They may be that but they aren't a blank slate. How willing are Europeans or Americans to really assimilate and interact with Middle Easterners?
We were a major factor in destabilizing their countries. We didn't understand them and didn't interact with them. I wish the militia man from Diyala Province well in Germany and I hope Germany deals with it's refugees better than they dealt with their Turkish workers. But I worry.
The reporting on refugees is wishful thinking: middle class Syrians, young workers to support aging Europeans, etc. They may be that but they aren't a blank slate. How willing are Europeans or Americans to really assimilate and interact with Middle Easterners?
We were a major factor in destabilizing their countries. We didn't understand them and didn't interact with them. I wish the militia man from Diyala Province well in Germany and I hope Germany deals with it's refugees better than they dealt with their Turkish workers. But I worry.
2
We did not learn after Korea. After Vietnam. After Chile. After Nicaragua. After El Salvador. After Cuba. After Iraq. After Afghanistan. After Pakistan.
After WWII, we did have a few wins (Bosnia, Grenada). And if WWII comes around again, I am sure we are in good shape. But mostly we have had devastating losses orchestrated by evil, cynical men (Cheney, Kissinger), evil gun runners, and bankrupt ideologies (trickle down, supply side, moral majority, neocons).
We can't do this. Likely no one can. If "Let's show them the way" worked, the whole world would be a Jeffersonian democracy by now. Particularly after the lives and coin Americans have sacrificed. We have, however, hurt and bankrupted ourselves - financially, intellectually, and morally, with incessant meddling. We have burnt every village in order to save it. We have Mi Lai, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and the whole of Latin America on our conscience.
Can we say: enough!
Can we now fix our roads, bridges, schools, healthcare, and angry young men with guns finding soft targets?
After WWII, we did have a few wins (Bosnia, Grenada). And if WWII comes around again, I am sure we are in good shape. But mostly we have had devastating losses orchestrated by evil, cynical men (Cheney, Kissinger), evil gun runners, and bankrupt ideologies (trickle down, supply side, moral majority, neocons).
We can't do this. Likely no one can. If "Let's show them the way" worked, the whole world would be a Jeffersonian democracy by now. Particularly after the lives and coin Americans have sacrificed. We have, however, hurt and bankrupted ourselves - financially, intellectually, and morally, with incessant meddling. We have burnt every village in order to save it. We have Mi Lai, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and the whole of Latin America on our conscience.
Can we say: enough!
Can we now fix our roads, bridges, schools, healthcare, and angry young men with guns finding soft targets?
2
Aw, Grenada! Reagan's fake war. Reagan another hollywood draft dodger during wwII. Grenada, trumped up lies, like all the rest of it since korea.
Note: you missed the LBJ invasion of the Dominican Republic! Making the place safe for steroid baseball prospects.
us army 1969-1971/california jd
Note: you missed the LBJ invasion of the Dominican Republic! Making the place safe for steroid baseball prospects.
us army 1969-1971/california jd
We should have known we would lose the war in Vietnam when the Buddhist monks started immolating themselves with gasoline. Anyone dedicated to a cause enough to have the convictions necessary to immolate one's self with gasoline will not be defeated. This type of conviction is derived from a culture. The communists of Vietnam possessed it. Call them what you may Islamic terrorist/warriors have it. G.W.Bush didn't understand the culture of the area he invaded. All the spin doctors in the world can't change that. Obama understands this, somewhat. Democracy is a strange concept. One cannot give it to another culture, they must want it enough to fight for it themselves.
2
Let's face it, we are there for one reason only, maybe two if we examine our commitment to Israel. If we'd invest the many Billions, even Trillions over the past 50 years into renewable energy sources, we might be in a better place. Yet, we have disillusioned ourselves by the idea we can transform tribal like societies to our economic advantage. It doesn't work and it never will. It's a waste of time, money and most importantly lives on both sides. Organized religion of all brands at home and abroad is the one unifying factor in the world we share with the most violent, primitive, corrupt cultures, our own zealots here in the United Sates chip away at decency, harmony between humans beings, and a sense of joy to living. All in the name of a portable God. We won't do what I'm about to propose but we should. I'd say outlaw organized religion, sink our intelligence and wealth into search for sustainable energy, and say goodbye to the misery in the Middle East. Let them fight it out with each other if they believe religion is so wonderful.
1
France and Great Britain created the modern Middle East, with an affirmative nod from Russia, with the secret Sykes-Picot agreement in 1916. In the 1950s, the United States became a major player in the Middle East with its overthrow, along with Great Britain, in the overthrow of the democratically-elected government in Iran.
The United States' 2003 military invasion of Iraq has proven to be the tipping point in the collapse of that ordered disorder. Such Western Powers and Russia/USSR interference in the Middle East was based from the beginning on the exploitation of the people and resources of the Great Powers construct and has deserved to be overthrown since 1916.
The U.S.'s continuing waste of American lives and treasure in the Middle East fits the pattern of everything that we have done wrong in the region for decades. Let the people of the Middle East do what they will with Russia in Syria and with themselves in their own way. If there is chaos to be seen in the region, it is a chaos of our own making.
The United States' 2003 military invasion of Iraq has proven to be the tipping point in the collapse of that ordered disorder. Such Western Powers and Russia/USSR interference in the Middle East was based from the beginning on the exploitation of the people and resources of the Great Powers construct and has deserved to be overthrown since 1916.
The U.S.'s continuing waste of American lives and treasure in the Middle East fits the pattern of everything that we have done wrong in the region for decades. Let the people of the Middle East do what they will with Russia in Syria and with themselves in their own way. If there is chaos to be seen in the region, it is a chaos of our own making.
1
The problem is not the tactics it is the strategy. If the strategy is wrong, then arguing about how many battalions are needed in one province or another at one time or another is futile. Whether it was Iraq, bombing Libya, intervening in Vietnam, overthrowing Iranian democracy, supporting Sisi (Pinochet on steroids) over the elected leader who stopped torture, messing around in the Ukraine, supplying Al Nusrah (ISIS) with guns and money while fighting the jihad inspired by our 'ally' Saudia Arabia home of the bin Ladins and 911.
This is the wisdom of Lao Tzu and why the US finds itself losing with the most powerful army in history. Worse than just strategic blunders, these atrocities, which is what many of them are, create other bad knock on effects, like the refugees pouring into Europe from those lands our policies wrecked, inflaming the European continent wide neo Nazi anti immigrant politics, growing in the place where the tragically undemocratic EU now falls and rots.
I have watched all these self inflicted tragedies unfold with a horrific inevitability as with the never ending 'Israeli Palestinian peace process. The really tragic insight is the realization that the Elite rule us through a dying democracy where its leadership class have utter contempt for we the untermensch. We are too many for them and have needs, so for them the disasters, they intentionally create, are opportunities for more control. So awareness and truth becomes the greatest crime. (Snowdon)
This is the wisdom of Lao Tzu and why the US finds itself losing with the most powerful army in history. Worse than just strategic blunders, these atrocities, which is what many of them are, create other bad knock on effects, like the refugees pouring into Europe from those lands our policies wrecked, inflaming the European continent wide neo Nazi anti immigrant politics, growing in the place where the tragically undemocratic EU now falls and rots.
I have watched all these self inflicted tragedies unfold with a horrific inevitability as with the never ending 'Israeli Palestinian peace process. The really tragic insight is the realization that the Elite rule us through a dying democracy where its leadership class have utter contempt for we the untermensch. We are too many for them and have needs, so for them the disasters, they intentionally create, are opportunities for more control. So awareness and truth becomes the greatest crime. (Snowdon)
1
How does the US still obsessed with the training of the Iraqi military and keeping Iraq together? A "political bargain" is indeed "futile" because it makes no sense to "unite the country’s Shiite and Sunni Arabs."
The Iraqi army has no appetite to fight ISIS and see it as "a Sunni problem." The Shiites believe that it's not worth "the blood of our children" to save Anbar.
The US should get the message that Iraq is on the verge of a breakup. Washington should let it happen. At least something good emerges after years of blood and treasure there. Fighting the ISIS would be a whole lot easier without the Shia militias and Iran.
The Iraqi army has no appetite to fight ISIS and see it as "a Sunni problem." The Shiites believe that it's not worth "the blood of our children" to save Anbar.
The US should get the message that Iraq is on the verge of a breakup. Washington should let it happen. At least something good emerges after years of blood and treasure there. Fighting the ISIS would be a whole lot easier without the Shia militias and Iran.
Please read: Why is the US still obsessed with.....
We either have the poorest intelligence coming from the Middle East or leaders who pay no attention to sound intelligence because we have been bogged down in wars there since 2003. We created chaos in Iraq, Libya and Syria and seem to have no idea have to rectify the situations. We continually are told by leaders about how strong we are, but we are using our strength in continually failing ways if the judge is ending the violence.
2
US intelligence is an oxymoron we are the dumbest nation on earth we get bogged down in these 1000 year wars. What does that make us not smart at all in my opinion.
Bear with me, as I'm a retired therapist and before that a teacher of young children:
To train anyone or effect change with anyone is not easy. Just having a strategy and even a method of implementing that strategy is insufficient. Because if my job depends upon the behavior of other persons, then the outcome is not in my hands, only the "going through the motions" part of it.
Unless someone deeply wants to learn or change, no amount of effort, strategy, training materials or time will make any difference. So it's motivation that first needs to be mobilized. And that is no easy task! And not just the motivation of a group. Because in the case of change or learning, it depends on the motivation of each and every person taking part.
In my view, it is a fool's errand to presume that I could teach reading, for example to children whose language and culture I do not know. Same thing for psychotherapy. How could I assess or assist someone I can't even communicate with?
And trust me, I know whereof I speak, having been married for 48 years to a European who grew up in a different culture, speaking another language. We are both highly educated and even raised in the same religion. But, assumptions we each grew up with, in different societies, along with all the body language and unconscious cultural cues embedded in words and actions have made for many miscues, problems, even hurt feelings over the years.
We are not the saviors so of the world!
To train anyone or effect change with anyone is not easy. Just having a strategy and even a method of implementing that strategy is insufficient. Because if my job depends upon the behavior of other persons, then the outcome is not in my hands, only the "going through the motions" part of it.
Unless someone deeply wants to learn or change, no amount of effort, strategy, training materials or time will make any difference. So it's motivation that first needs to be mobilized. And that is no easy task! And not just the motivation of a group. Because in the case of change or learning, it depends on the motivation of each and every person taking part.
In my view, it is a fool's errand to presume that I could teach reading, for example to children whose language and culture I do not know. Same thing for psychotherapy. How could I assess or assist someone I can't even communicate with?
And trust me, I know whereof I speak, having been married for 48 years to a European who grew up in a different culture, speaking another language. We are both highly educated and even raised in the same religion. But, assumptions we each grew up with, in different societies, along with all the body language and unconscious cultural cues embedded in words and actions have made for many miscues, problems, even hurt feelings over the years.
We are not the saviors so of the world!
2
It is abundantly clear. Our best reporters in our nation's best newspaper either did not read or cannot remember reading the dialogues of Plato. As I recall, The Republic well read would eliminate expectation of success in the matters reviewed here.
We are constantly regurgitating the obvious. Governments form. Then, government in a different form replaces. There is no magic to this. The people governed speak or remain silent, act or remain passive.
For us to believe that we can step into a culture with little or no understanding of how it works, unable to speak the language... and then attempt nation building when there is no hint of a nation - only tribal forms in constant conflict...
We must be nuts.
We are constantly regurgitating the obvious. Governments form. Then, government in a different form replaces. There is no magic to this. The people governed speak or remain silent, act or remain passive.
For us to believe that we can step into a culture with little or no understanding of how it works, unable to speak the language... and then attempt nation building when there is no hint of a nation - only tribal forms in constant conflict...
We must be nuts.
3
President Obama’s chosen strategy of foreign policy intrusion via drone and video screen weaponry is an abject failure unless the purpose is to be just that, ineffective and destabilizing, not for the targeted regime, whether Syria or Afghanistan, but instead the U.S., creating chaos and enemies around the globe. His global warming approach to diplomacy is proving the opposite while the sustainability of respect and global influence has rendered the term U.S. hegemony to the dustbin of the history.
2
"Hornet's nest." Warning by David Halberstam in a speech here at Elon University, 2003. We should have known.
2
If we are not prepared to do this ourselves - then leave. Let Putin take care of Syria; let the Taliban take over Afghanistan; let Iraq disintegrate into civil war, and let Iran become the dominant power in the region. That's it.
Attempts to wage war by proxy are doomed to failure. Some of these countries, notably Afghanistan, are countries only because some group drew borders around a geographical areas. In reality, the are a conglomeration of self governed tribes who have no frame of reference or desire for a centralized elected government. Tribal or sectarian loyalties are the overwhelming controlling factors. Shiites really don't want to fight Shiites. Sunnis don't want to fight Sunnis.
Armies cannot be built from uneducated and completely unmotivated men who have little concept or concern about geopolitical implications. It is either in the best interests of the United States, our allies, and the countries in the region to fight Isis and the Taliban and stop their incursions or it is not. If it is, as much as the President is reluctant to do so, it will require a strong, sustained military commitment including a material commitment from the United States. Anything short of that will lead to, as it already has, complete failure. If it is not in the best interests of this country to do that, then pull out, let the wars be waged, and at least don't sacrifice American lives for nothing.
Whatever we decide, we cannot continue on the current course.
Attempts to wage war by proxy are doomed to failure. Some of these countries, notably Afghanistan, are countries only because some group drew borders around a geographical areas. In reality, the are a conglomeration of self governed tribes who have no frame of reference or desire for a centralized elected government. Tribal or sectarian loyalties are the overwhelming controlling factors. Shiites really don't want to fight Shiites. Sunnis don't want to fight Sunnis.
Armies cannot be built from uneducated and completely unmotivated men who have little concept or concern about geopolitical implications. It is either in the best interests of the United States, our allies, and the countries in the region to fight Isis and the Taliban and stop their incursions or it is not. If it is, as much as the President is reluctant to do so, it will require a strong, sustained military commitment including a material commitment from the United States. Anything short of that will lead to, as it already has, complete failure. If it is not in the best interests of this country to do that, then pull out, let the wars be waged, and at least don't sacrifice American lives for nothing.
Whatever we decide, we cannot continue on the current course.
2
We are finally starting to see some positive results from our version of "The Surge", with a renewal of "Shock and Awe."
We have managed to drive he terrorist organization known as Doctors Without Border, who run the next work of terror disguised as a charitable organization, from Kunduz. Keep up the pressure, Mr. Obama, you can defeat DWB and drive it from Afghanistan if you really try by the end of your term!
"Mission Accomplished", Mr. Obama.
We have managed to drive he terrorist organization known as Doctors Without Border, who run the next work of terror disguised as a charitable organization, from Kunduz. Keep up the pressure, Mr. Obama, you can defeat DWB and drive it from Afghanistan if you really try by the end of your term!
"Mission Accomplished", Mr. Obama.
Dependence on American trained security forces is President Obama's core strategy in Afghanistan and Iraq despite the repeated failures. And one of Obama's favorite quotes is: "Doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity."
3
We Americans like the idea of winning a war fast, but not the idea of large American losses.
We also nurse an insane idea of spreading democracy to places with no clue what democracy means except as a way to con us out of munificent aid.
We try to fight wars via drones, close air support, smart bombs, and to some extent missiles. These made Iraq 1 look so good and at first Iraq 2 as well.
To save more lives we turn to the free market to hire super-costly mercenaries whose will to go the extra mile is very suspect.
The slogan 'win the hearts & minds of the people' used to seduce us into thinking we could win asymmetric wars cheap. Now we substitute it for thought & hard analysis.
Has winning the hearts and minds of the people ever won the US an asymmetric war? Not Viet Nam. Not Afghanistan. Not Iraq. Not Grenada. Not that jerkwater republic in former Yugoslavia. Not the current Iraq. Not the current Afghanistan.
We either have no clue how to win the people's hearts and minds or the whole concept is meaningless. Additionally, sitting between us and reality is the thought that super hi-tech can accomplish what well-trained ground troops cannot.
Did we win the (blah-blah) in WWII? No! We totally defeated Germany's ground forces and showed the Japanese what lay ahead if they kept fighting. We won wars, not arguments, minds, or hearts. Winning those wars was definite, but costly. And our win was unambiguous.
We also nurse an insane idea of spreading democracy to places with no clue what democracy means except as a way to con us out of munificent aid.
We try to fight wars via drones, close air support, smart bombs, and to some extent missiles. These made Iraq 1 look so good and at first Iraq 2 as well.
To save more lives we turn to the free market to hire super-costly mercenaries whose will to go the extra mile is very suspect.
The slogan 'win the hearts & minds of the people' used to seduce us into thinking we could win asymmetric wars cheap. Now we substitute it for thought & hard analysis.
Has winning the hearts and minds of the people ever won the US an asymmetric war? Not Viet Nam. Not Afghanistan. Not Iraq. Not Grenada. Not that jerkwater republic in former Yugoslavia. Not the current Iraq. Not the current Afghanistan.
We either have no clue how to win the people's hearts and minds or the whole concept is meaningless. Additionally, sitting between us and reality is the thought that super hi-tech can accomplish what well-trained ground troops cannot.
Did we win the (blah-blah) in WWII? No! We totally defeated Germany's ground forces and showed the Japanese what lay ahead if they kept fighting. We won wars, not arguments, minds, or hearts. Winning those wars was definite, but costly. And our win was unambiguous.
2
Good....more reason to get out and stay out
2
We have enough to deal with at home. One of these is mental illness. Walk down any street of any major city in this country and there are people with problems. Some more than others and in some cases violent like the one recently in Oregon. What are we exporting? How to kill? Bring it on home, bring our money and our troops home and lets clean up our own act. This huge expenditure for weaponry in America is truly a sickness. Not only in private hands but the industry of making bombs and fighter jets and missile shields and advanced automatic weapons and armored tanks is a sickness. Can't we evolve into showing the world that we too can change. That we can turn our swords into plowshares. That we can care for our own veterans even.
3
Billions of dollars wasted on foreign affairs. The middle eastern government needs a leader that will rise up to defend themselves. While we help Syria and countries alike fight their civil wars there is no guidance. The government has only resulted in thousands of casualties in airstrike bombings in an attempt to stop ISIS. It is pointless to waste billions of dollars on a result of government decisions that aren't our own while we have problems that haven't been solved as well.
Do you really think we can train a foreign people to oppose their own people?
The entire concept is a loser from the start. It's make work and budget padding for the Pentagon.
The entire concept is a loser from the start. It's make work and budget padding for the Pentagon.
3
This just further infuriates me. I am so sick of the resources (lives lost) wasted. With just a fraction that has been spent in such destructive activity we could have invested in our infrastructure, .education & building society. Follow the money to see that all that military spending is to enrich a few while others suffer. Our number one goal to solve this & other problems that are continuing to plague & destroy the fabric of all societies must be to GET MONEY OUT OF POLITICS - elections / corporate influence. In all these wars there is always the same outcome. The financiers & suppliers for the war profit (not just in the US) while societies suffer & then after the fighting the same profetiers gain more wealth during the rebuild process. It is gross & it will continue until we remove money from politics & say NO MORE. What does it take to take the blinders off?
3
Which is precisely what his growing number of critics have been saying since he started the reversal on his first day in office.
The man knew little and was opinionated...
And nothing he is doing will survive him for long...
The man knew little and was opinionated...
And nothing he is doing will survive him for long...
1
Suppose a prominent Republican reacted to the repeated failure of U.S.-trained forces on the battlefield by saying "...Stuff happens."
When we are confronted with violence at home, perpetrated by our own citizens, Republicans want to do nothing about it. If mass murder is perpetrated by foreigners, like on 9/11, we supposedly need to "fire, ready, aim" on everyone who might be responsible, and everyone who supports violence against Americans- or even just the people in the immediate vicinity. "Collateral damage" is just another way of saying "stuff happens." As more than one Republican voter was reported to have said: "Why aren't we nuking them?"
Why are we perplexed when the people we want to kill want to die for their cause, and the people we train want to live in order to get back to their families? Maybe they too just think "stuff happens"- why do anything about it?
When we are confronted with violence at home, perpetrated by our own citizens, Republicans want to do nothing about it. If mass murder is perpetrated by foreigners, like on 9/11, we supposedly need to "fire, ready, aim" on everyone who might be responsible, and everyone who supports violence against Americans- or even just the people in the immediate vicinity. "Collateral damage" is just another way of saying "stuff happens." As more than one Republican voter was reported to have said: "Why aren't we nuking them?"
Why are we perplexed when the people we want to kill want to die for their cause, and the people we train want to live in order to get back to their families? Maybe they too just think "stuff happens"- why do anything about it?
1
Geez, was i the only one who realized that we were wasting money by trying to train men who are not our allies, have no interest in fighting and probably share similar ideologies with our enemies? I mean i realized that from day one that this policy would fail, but the leaders of our government kept spending money and good after bad money at that.
The Russians have the right idea. Want to wipe them out? Bomb the bad guys into oblivion. Otherwise, we are wasting our time.
The Russians have the right idea. Want to wipe them out? Bomb the bad guys into oblivion. Otherwise, we are wasting our time.
2
And what do we want to do in Syria?
Guess...
We want to engage from the air and cross our fingers...
Let's pretend would be easier. And lots less expensive.
In my youth, we won every time.
Guess...
We want to engage from the air and cross our fingers...
Let's pretend would be easier. And lots less expensive.
In my youth, we won every time.
1
who's surprised by this. We're on the wrong side of history here and the only reason money is being spent and speeches have been made is because those on the bottom won't let those on the top admit it.
for the same reason Nixon didn't just quit vietnam when he came into office.
our lessons are so redundant
for the same reason Nixon didn't just quit vietnam when he came into office.
our lessons are so redundant
1
You can't train someone to fight and DIE for a cause they don't believe in.
4
The problem is clear.
We taught them to fight American style. That is with training, air support, medical evacuations, armored vehicles, overwhelming manpower, set up perimeters, sophisticated communications, supply infrastructure, American's leading, etc. etc. etc. We are getting whipped by fighters who have no training, no air force, no armored vehicles, limited communications, limited manpower, no infrastructure, limited leadership, etc., etc. etc.
We then withdraw our support.
Why don't we just teach them how to fight gorilla stype. Put them on the front lines for training just like the opposing forces. They fight to win or die trying instead or running away.
Add to that the waste and corruption. When will we ever learn?
We taught them to fight American style. That is with training, air support, medical evacuations, armored vehicles, overwhelming manpower, set up perimeters, sophisticated communications, supply infrastructure, American's leading, etc. etc. etc. We are getting whipped by fighters who have no training, no air force, no armored vehicles, limited communications, limited manpower, no infrastructure, limited leadership, etc., etc. etc.
We then withdraw our support.
Why don't we just teach them how to fight gorilla stype. Put them on the front lines for training just like the opposing forces. They fight to win or die trying instead or running away.
Add to that the waste and corruption. When will we ever learn?
In this ill-considered mess with ISIS and "training" programs—
I fear Mr. Obama's next move will be based on his LEGACY rather than on what he knows is the right thing to do.
I fear Mr. Obama's next move will be based on his LEGACY rather than on what he knows is the right thing to do.
2
I wonder if "progressives" will ever learn reality will trump ideology every time.
1
Really and what progressive got us in these messes in the first place? I didn't realize that GWB was a progressive.
And so we have bankrupted our nation for this! Thousands of us saw it coming from miles and years off, but we were ignored. This could so easily have been prevented!
When we have made up our minds on policy by imposing our beliefs and our needs, rather than seeking to understand the region or the culture...
When we have to impose "progress" by occupation or the business end of a gun...
When the People openly dislike their "new leadership" which we helped impose and prop up...
When the Leadership uses their Power to further their personal or tribal interests, enrich themselves or their cronies, or to take revenge upon their enemies...
When we in the West want "it" (whether it's Democracy, or some kind of government, or leadership, or result...) far more than the Locals do...
...these are all fatal indicators.
When there is self serving corruption, it trickles down from the top, and impacts the army, the police, and middle/local bureaucrats. That makes for a weak government with no invested loyalty from the citizens. It comes down to this Simple Truth: When a self serving, corrupt government does not uphold you, your familiy, your community, or your future, but is only a select band of robber barons looking out for themselves, then don't expect many to want to fight and die for that government. After years of not servicing the needs of the People, the People will not be there for you.
Even now, many on the Right want to go in and do it all over again. insanity!
When we have made up our minds on policy by imposing our beliefs and our needs, rather than seeking to understand the region or the culture...
When we have to impose "progress" by occupation or the business end of a gun...
When the People openly dislike their "new leadership" which we helped impose and prop up...
When the Leadership uses their Power to further their personal or tribal interests, enrich themselves or their cronies, or to take revenge upon their enemies...
When we in the West want "it" (whether it's Democracy, or some kind of government, or leadership, or result...) far more than the Locals do...
...these are all fatal indicators.
When there is self serving corruption, it trickles down from the top, and impacts the army, the police, and middle/local bureaucrats. That makes for a weak government with no invested loyalty from the citizens. It comes down to this Simple Truth: When a self serving, corrupt government does not uphold you, your familiy, your community, or your future, but is only a select band of robber barons looking out for themselves, then don't expect many to want to fight and die for that government. After years of not servicing the needs of the People, the People will not be there for you.
Even now, many on the Right want to go in and do it all over again. insanity!
3
Great article, and its accurate reflection of how there's a lack of accountability between us and the national governments we're working with.
How come we don't structure agreements so that the billions we budget for these programs place the funds in escrow, only to be released in stages when concrete results are produced on the legislative, legal, and executive branches which ensure the minimization of corruption, consistent delivery of basic services, strengthening for the rule of law, etc.? Do we have a program in place where those national governments with some wealth are putting up assets as a bond to ensure transparency and cooperation? It's apparent the winners so far are the arms manufacturer's, middlemen, and foreign government officials- and as usual, we are paying the price through taxes and blood.
How come we don't structure agreements so that the billions we budget for these programs place the funds in escrow, only to be released in stages when concrete results are produced on the legislative, legal, and executive branches which ensure the minimization of corruption, consistent delivery of basic services, strengthening for the rule of law, etc.? Do we have a program in place where those national governments with some wealth are putting up assets as a bond to ensure transparency and cooperation? It's apparent the winners so far are the arms manufacturer's, middlemen, and foreign government officials- and as usual, we are paying the price through taxes and blood.
It really isn’t difficult to understand why America has such a poor track record in “building” security forces. The people we “train” know that with rare exception there is less than an eight year shelf life for American foreign policy. The smart ones take our money and weapons and disappear before Washington abandons them.
What is difficult to understand is why Washington would believe that will ever change.
What is difficult to understand is why Washington would believe that will ever change.
1
Perhaps money can't solve moral dilemmas? But, money is involved in every aspect of these wars. The sale of weapons to any nation, or the deployment of US weapons-- it doesn't matter to the corporation making the sale. The internal indigenous conflicts about which supporting nations, on one side or the other, really don't know; the failure to blame and not talk, diplomatically or otherwise, to people directly, using proxy actors about which their loyalty or need to survive cannot be accurately estimated or counted on.
If its an ideology one is at war with: good luck! As strongly as you believe it is wrong, others knowingly or not, accepting it as "their way" will only change if provided with reasons that invite their understanding and participation AND some acknowledgment of who they are. Stamping out a people's belief and thinking they are going to be fighting with you is unrealistic. It is irrational to think that a people will fight against their own beliefs unless the equation changes through some moral undertaking that replaces what they were satisfied with for something better. Fighting and killing only changes differences temporarily. Anyone who fights you is demonstrating their will over yours. The last belief that people surrender is what suffices them other than to be subordinate or dead i.e., what sustains their will to live. Afghanistan is not a democracy; wasn't one in the past and likely will not become one. At least, it will not become one as the result war.
If its an ideology one is at war with: good luck! As strongly as you believe it is wrong, others knowingly or not, accepting it as "their way" will only change if provided with reasons that invite their understanding and participation AND some acknowledgment of who they are. Stamping out a people's belief and thinking they are going to be fighting with you is unrealistic. It is irrational to think that a people will fight against their own beliefs unless the equation changes through some moral undertaking that replaces what they were satisfied with for something better. Fighting and killing only changes differences temporarily. Anyone who fights you is demonstrating their will over yours. The last belief that people surrender is what suffices them other than to be subordinate or dead i.e., what sustains their will to live. Afghanistan is not a democracy; wasn't one in the past and likely will not become one. At least, it will not become one as the result war.
1
One Hundred Billion, Six Hundred Million plus. And for what? While cities are falling apart, veterans aren't getting medical care, millions of people are permanently unemployed and living in poverty, highest homeless population since the Depression. Does no one else see a problem with this? Is this all America stands for now?
1
ISIS, Taliban and other terrorist groups have a bone to pick with us only because we are there poking our noses in their tribal and religious maelstroms which, as such, are not susceptible to reason based resolution. In light of the intractable religious hatreds driving these internecine conflicts, making compromise impossible, the notion that we can help to create stable national governments in these places is an exercise in Pollyanna "thinking." Time to leave.
5
How can Americans be "baffled" by the failure of the soldiers they've trained? Those soldiers really have nothing to fight for but corrupt governments. Many of their commanders lack any experience and skills, appointed to their jobs through nepotism and political connections. Those commanders avoid the fighting and steal the payrolls.
This soldiers can fight effectively given a cause - their tribes, their religion. Certainly not the most corrupt governments on the planet. They're not dumb enough to give their lives for kleptocrats whose only interest is in enriching themselves, not in establishing honest, stable, equitable government. And they know that the Americans have propped up those corrupt politicians and dictators for decades.
Given these intractable circumstances, the smartest and most determined Iraqi, Afghan and Syrian soldiers will leave their failed nations and emigrate to places where they can thrive and live in peace.
This soldiers can fight effectively given a cause - their tribes, their religion. Certainly not the most corrupt governments on the planet. They're not dumb enough to give their lives for kleptocrats whose only interest is in enriching themselves, not in establishing honest, stable, equitable government. And they know that the Americans have propped up those corrupt politicians and dictators for decades.
Given these intractable circumstances, the smartest and most determined Iraqi, Afghan and Syrian soldiers will leave their failed nations and emigrate to places where they can thrive and live in peace.
4
Wasting billions in simplistic programs for building local forces has clearly been a failure everywhere. Who are the "leaders" in the CIA and Pentagon that continue selling this to the country, and why have they been allowed to retain their positions when they have such a dismal record of knowing what they are supposed to be doing? It looks as if the Pentagon and CIA have been building war contractors profits rather than local fighting forces. With our demonstrated ineptness in empire building, it appears to be long past time that we should have learned to spend our resources far more effectively than having war profiteers build paper tigers that have no real fight or scare value when needed.
3
So basically, the locals want us to fight their wars for them and in the face of organized opposition, run away, leaving American weapons in enemy hands.
I am offended by this, as an American taxpayer. That's MY money wasted over there.
Seems to me we shouldn't have stepped in, in the first place.
I am offended by this, as an American taxpayer. That's MY money wasted over there.
Seems to me we shouldn't have stepped in, in the first place.
5
How many times will the USA repeat the Vietnam lesson? If a nation's people refuse to stand for better government, billions of US dollars and near limitless military aid will do the job for them. The peoples of Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Syria are the only peoples who can accomplish the changes their peoples need. Uncle Sappy and Brother Russia can bath them in billions and fight their wars for them; but, nothing is permanent when it is served on a silver platter.
If the Middle East wants peace, it will have peace. Today the Middle East wants WAR and the USA doesn't need to feed the conflict American blood and money.
If the Middle East wants peace, it will have peace. Today the Middle East wants WAR and the USA doesn't need to feed the conflict American blood and money.
2
I think the basic issue is the huge cultural difference between the US and the rest of the world. Of course, every culture is distinct and different, as I notice almost daily here in Amsterdam meeting people from other European nations, but the gap between the US and other nations is very large. Many of the cultural differences are superficial: body language (eye contact), sports, but they may make it very difficult to get rapport between low-ranking troops. The language barrier is of course huge. If one tries to talk, it helps not to have a domineering attitude, and to permit long silences, and to let everyone relax; the natives may not be very interesting people to talk to, though, and may only be interested in your dough. It will take a long time. In short, there is no easy solution.
Excellent article. It makes one think the lack of leadership may start with the US strategy. I am not saying I have a better one, but if this tactic only works in a very small percentage of applications, then maybe we need to stop spending the time and dollars hoping for the best.
3
What if the Russians misinterpret American failures and incompetence, grow arrogant and underestimate the US Military?
At that point we face WW3.
Meanwhile, if Russia destroys the CIA's mercenaries and with Iran wraps up the Syrian War before the US elections, what will they extract from as revenge for the sanctions?
Who will outmaneuver whom? The US has relied on its extensive manufacturing base and young population ever since WW2. Those advantages now accrue to Russia, Iran and China.
Is the US experiencing a vacuum in the realm of cleverness?
At that point we face WW3.
Meanwhile, if Russia destroys the CIA's mercenaries and with Iran wraps up the Syrian War before the US elections, what will they extract from as revenge for the sanctions?
Who will outmaneuver whom? The US has relied on its extensive manufacturing base and young population ever since WW2. Those advantages now accrue to Russia, Iran and China.
Is the US experiencing a vacuum in the realm of cleverness?
2
For what purpose? It seems to me you are still living in the 1950s. if you have not noticed we now live in a Global economy and what is the point of trying to destroy the customers who feed your economy? Your comments are the ultimate in stupidity.
US foreign policy is a mess. The U.S. has extreme myopia when reflecting on the war, murder and chaos around the planet effected by the U.S. directly or through it proxies. Start with the Philippine Revolt in 1900 (750,000 natives dead) and fast forward through Iran, Viet Nam, Iran again when supporting Hussein in the Iran - Iraq War, Latin America, Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia to name a few.
Obama has tried and failed to use proxies. ISIS reamins in Iraq. The Taliban are reconquering Afghanistan. And the global war on terror that he inherited from George W. and has expanded greatly has done nothing but fan the fires of Islamic extremism and make the US more hated than it was in 2008.
And now Russian military is supporting Assad in Syria. Will Obama draw another "red line"? Does he still own a red pen? or have they all been taken away from him?
Obama has tried and failed to use proxies. ISIS reamins in Iraq. The Taliban are reconquering Afghanistan. And the global war on terror that he inherited from George W. and has expanded greatly has done nothing but fan the fires of Islamic extremism and make the US more hated than it was in 2008.
And now Russian military is supporting Assad in Syria. Will Obama draw another "red line"? Does he still own a red pen? or have they all been taken away from him?
2
The airstrike on MSF facilities destroyed many thousands times my contribution to them! MSF must be reimbursed by those who calused this airstrike!
1
Similar to the mistakes made in Vietnam and in Iraq; Obama's strong suit is spending money. Whether it's spent on solar power (failure) companies, doubling the number of wellfare & food-stamp recipients, the amount of money spent on his campaign, printing money, or examples like this one spelled out in the article- it is definitely the only "other" strength of Obama. His primary strength is of course his oratory lie and political self praise skill.
If training the tribal fighters was the answer didn't Obama realize it would have already been accomplished? Training some troops here and there; sending in a drone here and there. It's no surprrise that the strategy or lack thereof failed. I think President Obama would do well to practice a bit of self insight much like what he said to Hilary Clinton "there's a difference between running for president and being president". These last 8 years what we have seen is a man that has been running for president for 8 long years and never stepped up to actually being the president.
If training the tribal fighters was the answer didn't Obama realize it would have already been accomplished? Training some troops here and there; sending in a drone here and there. It's no surprrise that the strategy or lack thereof failed. I think President Obama would do well to practice a bit of self insight much like what he said to Hilary Clinton "there's a difference between running for president and being president". These last 8 years what we have seen is a man that has been running for president for 8 long years and never stepped up to actually being the president.
2
"Arming/training the rebels" has never worked. So can we finally put to rest this persistent myth that Obama could have single-handedly averted the Syria crisis if only he had "armed the rebels" at the beginning?
2
Our policies on foreign relations have been a failure since WWII. We have tried to establish, what our founding fathers did not desire, an empire. We have colonized, by building military bases around the world next to valued natural resources (Iraq oil, Columbia water, and the list goes on), all to profit our corporations. We have promoted insurgencies in lands where there leaders were unfriendly to our approaches. We stigmatize our enemies as the devil in order to keep our population scared and motivated. We claim to promote democracy, but do not support the results when they displease us, i.e.: Palestine, or Algeria (when the Islamist front won the elections), or make a joke out them like in Iraq and Afghanistan. We support with our mercenaries, our private security companies, our money, our military equipment, fallacies that we call governments and we are surprised when they fail because they have no legitimacy than our say so. By our actions we create these extremist. The best examples are Iraq and Afghanistan, but one just needs to know his history to see many others and some as close as central and south America. Our foreign policy can no longer be run by corporate interest, or these corporate wars will continue, and we will continue to lose these wars. For if it is only about greed, our greed, our puppet's greed, then we should not be surprised to see our minions defect and rise against us, using our weapons.
2
This Middle East debacle, particularly, started from our macho, cowboy culture, that a weapon will make people and leaders of nations do as we say; how is that going?
And to think that an Iraqi army trained and equipped by USA would not fight a then rag-tag bunch of Toyota driving (ISIS) thugs; they were mostly remnants of formerly Saddam's army. But Obama is criticized not having Pentagon, in far less time, to half equip and half-train a number of so called free Syrian Army to defeat Assad.
And obviously in that pursuit, they were expected not to have their weapons taken or given to those very same ISIS thugs.
Our leadership should first appreciate Americans are the backbone for other nations’ troops and imparted aspirational democracy and when we leave their hopes do as well. The history of our boldly going into nations to fight insurgents, or overthrowing governments only then to leave locals to fight are mirrored by Vietnam, Philippines, Iraq and now Afghanistan?
And to think that an Iraqi army trained and equipped by USA would not fight a then rag-tag bunch of Toyota driving (ISIS) thugs; they were mostly remnants of formerly Saddam's army. But Obama is criticized not having Pentagon, in far less time, to half equip and half-train a number of so called free Syrian Army to defeat Assad.
And obviously in that pursuit, they were expected not to have their weapons taken or given to those very same ISIS thugs.
Our leadership should first appreciate Americans are the backbone for other nations’ troops and imparted aspirational democracy and when we leave their hopes do as well. The history of our boldly going into nations to fight insurgents, or overthrowing governments only then to leave locals to fight are mirrored by Vietnam, Philippines, Iraq and now Afghanistan?
1
US trained forces in the 3rd world fail for the same reason that these nations are failed states to begin with - they have authoritarian social and political cultures that accept and even expect leaders to be selfish, lazy, corrupt and cowardly, that once a person gains any even trivial amount of power they are allowed/expected to act with impunity. That is why, as this and numerous articles have reported, that as soon as military advisor officers from Western nations leave these 3rd world military units collapse. Because foreign officers begin stealing the soldier's pay, selling arms and ammunition to the enemy, using their power to threaten and steal from their own citizens, running away when a battle gets tough and taking sides with one of the country's political parties. These nations can not be reformed from the outside because a significant percentage of their citizens have a vested interest in the inherent racism, cultures of corruption, ethnic discrimination, and nepotism and connections as ways to success as opposed to merit that so typifies these societies. These societies should be isolated (no mass out migrations allowed) and boycotted until they have devolved-degraded and suffered enough that their corrupt elites decide that even their existence is so threatened by the anarchy that they will concede to give up their privileges and accept, allow or even lead movements of progressive change.
7
Vietnam, all over again.
But companies like Halliburton have done well by it all.
But companies like Halliburton have done well by it all.
10
Does anyone here see the irony of the NY Times placements on the front page? This article appears next to an article delineating how pharmaceutical companies are raising prices for profitability, and not people raking in billions of dollars for executives, shareholders and bondholders.
Billions are being poured into nations training troops unsuccessfully for Muslim on Muslim violence. Millions of Americans are unable to afford medicines or on the verge of bankruptcy due to medical illnesses.
What's wrong with this picture?
Billions are being poured into nations training troops unsuccessfully for Muslim on Muslim violence. Millions of Americans are unable to afford medicines or on the verge of bankruptcy due to medical illnesses.
What's wrong with this picture?
10
More than 5 years ago, I warned of the futility of expecting Shia to fight to protect Sunnis or the reverse. Only recently have Americans come around to this conclusion. It should be noted that ISIL and other armies of insurgent radicals in the Middle East have succeeded militarily without the billions and billions of dollars spent by the U.S. on military training of units in the area.
'This leads to a further conclusion, in each of these countries, the only people able to successfully mount military operation and successful long term occupations are operated and controlled by indigenous people. Outside direction of military operations can only achieve victory in battles but are unsuccessful in their efforts to occupy and pacify.
'This leads to a further conclusion, in each of these countries, the only people able to successfully mount military operation and successful long term occupations are operated and controlled by indigenous people. Outside direction of military operations can only achieve victory in battles but are unsuccessful in their efforts to occupy and pacify.
4
So many billions and trillions pumped into warfare with nothing to show for it. It boggles the mind to consider the vast infrastructure improvements that could have been made. Leadership prioritizes failed foreign policy and useless tech (see F-35). Sickening.
8
Mr Obama needs to admit his mistake in his approach to ISIS—
And get the United States OUT of that ill-considered venture.
It is the typical Obama "half-way"—middle-of-the-road, partial-this and partial-that (and always slow-on-the-draw) approach.
In the name of the people of the United States, STOP this endless war insanity!
And get the United States OUT of that ill-considered venture.
It is the typical Obama "half-way"—middle-of-the-road, partial-this and partial-that (and always slow-on-the-draw) approach.
In the name of the people of the United States, STOP this endless war insanity!
7
As a comparison entire NIH budget is 30 billion per year, how many new cures, drugs, and science could have been generated by these billions spent on death.
5
As Trump said: "let Russia run Syria".
That should apply to all of the Middle East.
We have no business there.
Declare victory and leave.
That should apply to all of the Middle East.
We have no business there.
Declare victory and leave.
5
Ought to keep this article in mind as the administration begins to spend more money training the Ukrainian security forces.
4
Not only a failure, we have made the situation worse by pouring tens of millions of handguns, rifles and other weapons into these unstable countries. The purported soldiers love being on payroll and receiving unlimited weapons they can "lose" for more money in the black market, but have little desire to fight (1) their own countrymen/clan members/relatives or (2) a more fiercely determined foe. Let's either fight the wars ourselves or, even better, admit there are some problems we cannot solve and stay out. These half-measures are worse than useless.
5
Neoconservative foreign policy of past 15 years has utterly failed with devastating results for millions in middle east and our veterans. Will these thriving criminals be ever brought to justice
2
This is nothing more than welfare for US contractors and the Pentagon gone amuck! Congress is pathetic with no direction and no leader in the Whitehouse.
Bush and Cheney started something that has become a snowball in progress that Washington does't seem to either understand or is trying to make as much money using taxpayer dollars to fill their pockets leaving the US taxpayer bankrupt!
Bush and Cheney started something that has become a snowball in progress that Washington does't seem to either understand or is trying to make as much money using taxpayer dollars to fill their pockets leaving the US taxpayer bankrupt!
4
Your tax dollars at work: lining the pockets of the military-industrial complex and filling ratholes around the world. It's time to stop this nonsense.
7
The missionaries trying to beat the natives into seeing the correctness of their way. It seems rat Vietnam nam is doing quite well and even has tourism once the US got out of the way.
1
How do you train people to fight for an ideology [Democracy] they simply can't comprehend--? Especially without breaking their cultural heritages. Every one of these U.S. trained "freedom fighters" whole heatedly believe in misogynistic practices like arranged marriage between children and men, and stoning women for whatever reason. Middle East culture is arcane and it is is broken. This story proves money and might will not fix or transform thousands of years of fanatical ideology administered through the teachings of Islam.
1
The Israelils are not fanatics.
So, what's new?? We have a history of doing this all over the world, time and again. The problems lie not with the foreign forces, the problems lie within our procedures, priorities and attitudes. We seem not to care about a billion dollars here, a billion dollars there, as long as the billions build smoke screens which will soon be forgotten, only to reappear in a new place. (sigh)
3
"But what many of them have in common, American military and counterterrorism officials say, is poor leadership, a lack of will and the need to function in the face of intractable political problems with little support. Without their American advisers, many local forces have repeatedly shown an inability to fight."
A recipe for big money from US taxpayers flushed down the toilet or perhaps into corrupt hands. And in Afghanistan, the murdering of some of our trainers by the trainees. Time to call an end to these losing efforts. People form their own destinies.
A recipe for big money from US taxpayers flushed down the toilet or perhaps into corrupt hands. And in Afghanistan, the murdering of some of our trainers by the trainees. Time to call an end to these losing efforts. People form their own destinies.
2
Rather than insert military forces into countries like Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, we and our allies should offer resettlement programs for those who wish to escape cultures of religious and gender oppression and assimilate into other cultures. The countries they abandon will become mostly male societies incapable of sustaining their population.
2
Over the past dozen years, perhaps one hundred generals and admirals, plus scores of senior career civil servants have been give great credit--promotions, bonus, the first (well paid) job after leaving govt or the military--for their success in training and equipping our proxies in Iraq and Afgh. Would the NYT please name the officials responsible for these failed programs??
3
Another weak president with no military background, intimidated by the generals and hawks into fighting endless, unwinnable wars. We will not have peace unless and until we elect a president like Eisenhower, a man who had the chops and resume to say no.
2
Two Comments:
1. This article appeared on the same day as another article describing the difficulties the Chinese face in completing ambitious projects to build railroads, highways, dams, canals and even a railroad that would connect South American countries on both sides of the continents. The US, in contrast, spend billions on insurgents whose primary motivation is financial. Which country do you think will win the PR war in the long run?
2. Let's not forget that the billions were spent after the US played a significant role in attempts to overthrow the government that was in power under the assumption that Democracy would blossom on its own, but it didn't, so the US is stuck with spending billions in "peace keeping" because the "new leaders" that evolve in these "fledgling " Democracies are sometimes worse than the former regimes that the US helped toppled.
1. This article appeared on the same day as another article describing the difficulties the Chinese face in completing ambitious projects to build railroads, highways, dams, canals and even a railroad that would connect South American countries on both sides of the continents. The US, in contrast, spend billions on insurgents whose primary motivation is financial. Which country do you think will win the PR war in the long run?
2. Let's not forget that the billions were spent after the US played a significant role in attempts to overthrow the government that was in power under the assumption that Democracy would blossom on its own, but it didn't, so the US is stuck with spending billions in "peace keeping" because the "new leaders" that evolve in these "fledgling " Democracies are sometimes worse than the former regimes that the US helped toppled.
3
Viet Nam all over again. Its shameful.
4
President Obama had a noble vision, but one not based on reality. There was no precedent or history to support the program of training soldiers, and now we have the experience that it doesn't work.
The question is- what to do now? There is no reason to double down on this failed strategy.
In the end, President Obama will be judged by his results, not his intentions. He has a few months to reverse the course of his screw-ups.
The question is- what to do now? There is no reason to double down on this failed strategy.
In the end, President Obama will be judged by his results, not his intentions. He has a few months to reverse the course of his screw-ups.
1
Often, it is good to have an alternative, accurate source of information where there is no agenda. Case in point:
Last year an RCMP principle who spent 18 months in Iraq to help train but not recruit, security forces indicated afterwards in several interviews that the process was doomed to failure almost from the outset. He indicated opposition forces and those with anti-government terrorist aspirations were starting to infiltrate the trainees, hence, the failures now being experienced from those that were suppose to take over the reigns of securing the country. Of course, even when made aware of the situation, for the most part, the Iraqi government chose to ignore it.
The results today are not surprising, just a considerable sum of money and lives wasted because the decision makers failed miserably in their ability to assess what has really been happening on the ground.
Last year an RCMP principle who spent 18 months in Iraq to help train but not recruit, security forces indicated afterwards in several interviews that the process was doomed to failure almost from the outset. He indicated opposition forces and those with anti-government terrorist aspirations were starting to infiltrate the trainees, hence, the failures now being experienced from those that were suppose to take over the reigns of securing the country. Of course, even when made aware of the situation, for the most part, the Iraqi government chose to ignore it.
The results today are not surprising, just a considerable sum of money and lives wasted because the decision makers failed miserably in their ability to assess what has really been happening on the ground.
What a waste. Time and again, we prop up some phony, 2 bit, street-corner-thug of a dictator to lead some Country that we're "trying to save", only to have them take our endless buckets of money, guns and training - and then turn on us. Our failed policy in Iraq literally created ISIS.
Vietnam. Iraq. Afganistan. Its pretty obvious to see this pattern of waste. Worse, American troop death is also part of the bargain.
So WHY does American policy continue to do this ? Are we fighting for Democracy "over there", or equal rights for Women, or Religious freedom? No.
We are fighting to keep the World safe for Defense Contractors and Big Oil.
And for all of those wasted Billions of Dollars, the Republican Congress & Senate want to cut funding for Planned Parenthood. Our highways and bridges desperately need repair. Our teachers and fire fighters deserve a raise.
There is NO balance or sense of accurate priorities in our Govenment anymore. Only greed.
Vietnam. Iraq. Afganistan. Its pretty obvious to see this pattern of waste. Worse, American troop death is also part of the bargain.
So WHY does American policy continue to do this ? Are we fighting for Democracy "over there", or equal rights for Women, or Religious freedom? No.
We are fighting to keep the World safe for Defense Contractors and Big Oil.
And for all of those wasted Billions of Dollars, the Republican Congress & Senate want to cut funding for Planned Parenthood. Our highways and bridges desperately need repair. Our teachers and fire fighters deserve a raise.
There is NO balance or sense of accurate priorities in our Govenment anymore. Only greed.
6
It sounds like a number of the soldiers signed up in hopes of a steady paycheck and an increase in social influence, and not to engage the enemies of their government. This sentence near the end of the article also caught my attention:
"Soldiers and militiamen, many of whom said they had not been paid in months, are dropping their weapons and heading for Europe."
So, another thing Europe will have to deal with is the trained military and security personnel who are AWOL from their units, heading to Europe on American taxpayer money, to make new lives with their families. Given what we've read over the last couple of weeks about some Afghani commanders and soldiers some of the men entering Europe unchecked, and without papers, may well have legal/ human rights issues in their home countries that need to be addressed.
"Soldiers and militiamen, many of whom said they had not been paid in months, are dropping their weapons and heading for Europe."
So, another thing Europe will have to deal with is the trained military and security personnel who are AWOL from their units, heading to Europe on American taxpayer money, to make new lives with their families. Given what we've read over the last couple of weeks about some Afghani commanders and soldiers some of the men entering Europe unchecked, and without papers, may well have legal/ human rights issues in their home countries that need to be addressed.
1
All these great schools of "International Affairs" and the effectiveness of our policies are no more predictable than a roulette wheel. It makes you wonder what our experts have been studying, because apparently they haven't learned anything. Nothing but failures of foreign policy since ... WWII?
2
"Billions From U.S. Fail to Sustain Foreign Forces - but it sure has "sustained" US military contractor profits.
1
On the front page 2 articles one talks about ripping off the government and it's citizens with drug price increases the other on wasted military spending on foreign wars what will it take for the people to wake up. Have to go a bunch of people are about to hurt each other on tv don't want to miss it.
2
It is not just that the tactics and expenditures of the US government have been ineffective. The goals themselves have been fundamentally wrongheaded and rooted in ignorance.
1
Rarely will surrogates provide the indomitable commitment, loyalty and sacrifice of one's own troops.
It seems to me we should have learned this lesson long ago.
This is not to say we should be sending in ground troops instead. Far from it. We've sown quite enough chaos in the last 14 years. The world could use a vacation from American interventions.
It seems to me we should have learned this lesson long ago.
This is not to say we should be sending in ground troops instead. Far from it. We've sown quite enough chaos in the last 14 years. The world could use a vacation from American interventions.
1
That $150 billion we gave Iran is going to come in handy.
1
The flight of Middle Easterners into Europe elucidates the importance of international institutions, not the United States, intervening militarily in these tumultuous states.
Why? Mostly because the US has relatively weak economic/historic/cultural interests (much less interests being imminently threatened) in these places.
Now history could potentially hold us responsible for starting in Iraq what looks more and more like a new age of international conflict (and maybe we should just start calling this a "world war" instead of "Arab Spring"), and for not very good reasons. Beyond the ruin caused in Iraq, our actions are now a proximate cause for (i) enflaming a regional Sunni / Shiite religious war that, as of 2001, strongmen in Iraq, Iran & Syria had more or less stabilized, (ii) crushing one of the strongest global oil economies (and potentially converting it to a financing source for ISIL's international network) and (iii) causing mass migration of people from the Middle East to Europe.
We have already gone too far half heartedly supporting rebel groups in Syria who have a doomed cause, and Putin has called our bluff. The UN, not us, should act there, if it can, because states other than the U.S. will be more affected by the immigration fallout. Now, Russia can play our game of direct intervention from a position of strength, supporting the winning side, which also happens to be a historic partner they promised to protect.
Why? Mostly because the US has relatively weak economic/historic/cultural interests (much less interests being imminently threatened) in these places.
Now history could potentially hold us responsible for starting in Iraq what looks more and more like a new age of international conflict (and maybe we should just start calling this a "world war" instead of "Arab Spring"), and for not very good reasons. Beyond the ruin caused in Iraq, our actions are now a proximate cause for (i) enflaming a regional Sunni / Shiite religious war that, as of 2001, strongmen in Iraq, Iran & Syria had more or less stabilized, (ii) crushing one of the strongest global oil economies (and potentially converting it to a financing source for ISIL's international network) and (iii) causing mass migration of people from the Middle East to Europe.
We have already gone too far half heartedly supporting rebel groups in Syria who have a doomed cause, and Putin has called our bluff. The UN, not us, should act there, if it can, because states other than the U.S. will be more affected by the immigration fallout. Now, Russia can play our game of direct intervention from a position of strength, supporting the winning side, which also happens to be a historic partner they promised to protect.
For some strange reason Republicans feel that anything financed by the federal government is waste, except of course national defense. Perhaps they should broaden their philosophy. There is no greater money pit than the spending of us tax dollars in foreign lands for purposes of supporting allied defense forces. I am sure recipients of these funds laugh all the way the bank whenever the big stupid US spending machine hands out money to foreign regimes. Just look at ex-president Karzai in Afghanistan (with his brother the banker) who walked away with billions of US tax dollars. Makes you wonder why we bother to pay taxes at all.....
2
"For some strange reason Republicans feel that anything financed by the federal government is waste, except of course national defense."
For some strange reason many Democrats actually believe that nonsense. There are no doubt some extremists in the GOP who may feel that way, but most Republicans want reasonable spending on things that are truly within the purview of the federal government. There is no end to federal waste which is what many in the GOP object to.
For some strange reason many Democrats actually believe that nonsense. There are no doubt some extremists in the GOP who may feel that way, but most Republicans want reasonable spending on things that are truly within the purview of the federal government. There is no end to federal waste which is what many in the GOP object to.
Like all levels of our government; run by years of incompetence protected by incestuous nepotism with literally countless tax dollars stolen by the psychopaths who have controlled the whole show for quite some time. Clearly we are still missing the point.
1
"But what many of them have in common... is poor leadership, a lack of will and the need to function in the face of intractable political problems with little support."
Un-PC to say it, perhaps, but what is left unsaid is the reality - it is a cultural failure, the same reason that these countries (if one can even call them that in the modern sense), and others similarly situated in the Middle East and Africa, have their problems to begin with. The deeply rooted tribalism, sectarianism, lack of any historic recognition or application of basic tenets of freedom, human dignity and tolerance, all add up to being doomed to failure. Blame the West, America, colonialism, whatever, all you want, but the sad reality is until these nations decide on their own to move out of the past, then all the money and advisors in the world will not change the end result. The impetus and drive for improvement and change must come from within and not just from an elite few, but from their cultures and society at large.
Un-PC to say it, perhaps, but what is left unsaid is the reality - it is a cultural failure, the same reason that these countries (if one can even call them that in the modern sense), and others similarly situated in the Middle East and Africa, have their problems to begin with. The deeply rooted tribalism, sectarianism, lack of any historic recognition or application of basic tenets of freedom, human dignity and tolerance, all add up to being doomed to failure. Blame the West, America, colonialism, whatever, all you want, but the sad reality is until these nations decide on their own to move out of the past, then all the money and advisors in the world will not change the end result. The impetus and drive for improvement and change must come from within and not just from an elite few, but from their cultures and society at large.
2
Much of the problem certainly lies in the morale and willingness to fight of these local US-trained forces in places such as Afghanistan and Iraq. But with the exception of special force units which are highly selective and specially trained, our record is fairly lamentable when these forces come against motivated and often battle-hardened insurgents.
Part of the problem may well be that we try to train these forces to make war the American way but only up to a point. After all, the conventional US way is to employ massive firepower using artillery and air power and sophisticated communications and logistic systems to sustain those forces. The Afghan and Iraqi forces have little or no indigenous air support, they cannot evacuate their casualties as quickly, which impacts morale, and they cannot bring to bear the sort of overall firepower of their US mentors.
Maybe we need to train them in ways that better suit local conditions and the opponent they face. And we should lay much greater emphasis on junior as well as middle and higher level leadership and unconventional war techniques to turn the tables on the insurgents.
Our training methodology has clearly not worked - and that is true whether a Democrat or a Republican was in the White House. Our military needs to review its practices and come up with a better plan.
Part of the problem may well be that we try to train these forces to make war the American way but only up to a point. After all, the conventional US way is to employ massive firepower using artillery and air power and sophisticated communications and logistic systems to sustain those forces. The Afghan and Iraqi forces have little or no indigenous air support, they cannot evacuate their casualties as quickly, which impacts morale, and they cannot bring to bear the sort of overall firepower of their US mentors.
Maybe we need to train them in ways that better suit local conditions and the opponent they face. And we should lay much greater emphasis on junior as well as middle and higher level leadership and unconventional war techniques to turn the tables on the insurgents.
Our training methodology has clearly not worked - and that is true whether a Democrat or a Republican was in the White House. Our military needs to review its practices and come up with a better plan.
6
Excellent point. Maybe we should given them nuclear missiles.
"...calling into question the effectiveness of the tens of billions of dollars spent by the United States ..."
Thanks for telling it like it is, Times.
(This what you were talking about, Ms. Sullivan?)
Thanks for telling it like it is, Times.
(This what you were talking about, Ms. Sullivan?)
1
We should have never stepped into Iraq, Libya and Syria. Time to cut the losses and pull out. There is no upside to meddling in the politics of the Middle East.
5
For all we know the billions in aid and arms could be going into the hands of ISIS the Taliban or Al Qaeda.
2
Our commander in chief has failed to learn that he is the top of the best fighting machine on earth. He cannot build another on like it using cheap parts from around the world. He will probably not even learn that from seeing first hand what happened when he tried.
1
The age of hard power is gone.
Can we just concentrate on building soft power?
We used to be good at both, but flexing your muscle isn't as effective at this age and is very cost inefficient.
Can we just concentrate on what we are still good at? Sharing the American culture and ideology by investing heavily on education and infrastructure?
America became the top country not because of military prowess. America became the top country because people admire and aspired the American value of freedom and virtues. Back in the days, foreign people were jealous of Americans. Now, ask what they think of the US. Quite a turnaround in a few decades.
Can we just concentrate on building soft power?
We used to be good at both, but flexing your muscle isn't as effective at this age and is very cost inefficient.
Can we just concentrate on what we are still good at? Sharing the American culture and ideology by investing heavily on education and infrastructure?
America became the top country not because of military prowess. America became the top country because people admire and aspired the American value of freedom and virtues. Back in the days, foreign people were jealous of Americans. Now, ask what they think of the US. Quite a turnaround in a few decades.
11
Thank you. My subsequent points exactly. Being out of the world domination game would be our salvation.
We need those billions ourselves real bad. Our needs have become critical. Our roads, bridges and infrastructure have stayed in the dark ages. Our shelters have become roach-infested, crumbling. Our children have become uneducated, teachers threatened and schools dilapidated. Our esteemed institutions of learning and research are going unfunded.Our rivers are polluted, environment threatened. Women's health is being attacked. And so is our cherished social nets for our citizens and selfless veterans on the chopping block. People are finding that the support system to tide over unemployment have all but disappeared especially in these times when jobs have become a luxury. Talk of priorities! All our needs can be met by a fraction of the billions we are flushing down the toilet at a fast clip. If there was something to show for it, then maybe.... But we have nothing except a loss of credibility and earning the world's ire.
5
Armies are used to protect or conquer. Aside from eliminating the Al Qaeda threat from Afghanistan what have been our protective or conquering objectives in the region?
We are told that "promoting democracy" will keep us safer but our military is not a PR tool.
Past leaders have created vague and impossible military goals. I think Obama understands that and is stepping back for a reason.
We are told that "promoting democracy" will keep us safer but our military is not a PR tool.
Past leaders have created vague and impossible military goals. I think Obama understands that and is stepping back for a reason.
can we please stop with the fiction that this country has any interest whatsoever in promoting democracy or equal representation. those billions (trillions, actually) were never intended for that outcome; they were intended to enrich the parasites who thrive on the dysfunction of governments (much like our own), who sell their weapons of slaughter all while basking in the sun on their multi-million dollar yachts.
6
And it's much deeper than the military-industrial complex... they are also "opening markets" for cars, cellphones, junk food, and all the other consumerist blights that slowly kill Americans and destroy the environment. Ours is a machine for making death, no matter which way you spin it.
this article failed to establish why it costs so much to train these foreign fighters. I'm sure it costs less to train U.S troops who I imagine get a lot more attention. Where is all the money going? My first thought is fraud, graft and waste.
3
In war and defense spending the U.S. is utterly reckless. No interest in accountability. Not a peep from the national debt hawks. The money just flows. Some of it flows in war zones. Some for failing weapons systems. But the grip of contactors and self-interested officials makes sure it flows. And flows.
And then we sometimes get angry that other countries are not as reckless in wasting their national treasure. Like China and Japan. We are utterly self-blind on the subject.
And then we sometimes get angry that other countries are not as reckless in wasting their national treasure. Like China and Japan. We are utterly self-blind on the subject.
1
It is all about leadership. Ever notice that all viable ME countries have tough leaders that do not respect human rights. Middle Easterners respect this kind of power and will easily switch sides so they are in line with the most powerful, or put another way, not against those holding power. This is alien to our way of thinking and against our moral upbringing, but to them is the only way to lead/control a people divided by just about everything.
Also, if there is something that is being given away (training and arms), they will take it. As long as the goods are flowing they will do and say whatever the giver wants to hear. But as soon as the goods stop, they will go back to the way they were. ISIS is cruel, and as a result is respected. They fill the leadership gap in areas where it is weak or non-existant. Putin understands this and this is why he is supporting Assad and not the rebels.
Also, if there is something that is being given away (training and arms), they will take it. As long as the goods are flowing they will do and say whatever the giver wants to hear. But as soon as the goods stop, they will go back to the way they were. ISIS is cruel, and as a result is respected. They fill the leadership gap in areas where it is weak or non-existant. Putin understands this and this is why he is supporting Assad and not the rebels.
3
I think our failure in training forces in the Middle East is really a cultural problem. We don't understand that culture, we don't speak the language.
I suspect that Shia have no desire to die helping Sunnis -nor is it easy to meld the two sects into a unified force. Also I think there is a lack of nationhood in these countries. Shia don't care what happens in Sunni areas and vice versa. Their concern is their own Shia area. With that mentality it would be better to divide the country by religions and let each sect be responsible for the area of its own sect.
In Afghanistan I think the problem is morale. The morale of the Taliban is higher than the morale of the Afghan forces to keep them out.
I think our failure is due to understanding these feudal states of the Middle East. And like it are not the Middle East is really about feudal states. Look to the middle ages to better understand the Middle East. Their loyalties are more akin to that of feudal states, like Europe was before the 30 Years war.
They don't have a sense of belonging and supporting a nation state.
I suspect that Shia have no desire to die helping Sunnis -nor is it easy to meld the two sects into a unified force. Also I think there is a lack of nationhood in these countries. Shia don't care what happens in Sunni areas and vice versa. Their concern is their own Shia area. With that mentality it would be better to divide the country by religions and let each sect be responsible for the area of its own sect.
In Afghanistan I think the problem is morale. The morale of the Taliban is higher than the morale of the Afghan forces to keep them out.
I think our failure is due to understanding these feudal states of the Middle East. And like it are not the Middle East is really about feudal states. Look to the middle ages to better understand the Middle East. Their loyalties are more akin to that of feudal states, like Europe was before the 30 Years war.
They don't have a sense of belonging and supporting a nation state.
1
Haven't we seen this before? Remember all those M-16;s left on the ground brand new never fired in the Spring of 1975?
1
It seems that untrained fighters in Iraq-Afganistan-etc run all over "our team" except when members of our team are out -running them to escape. Maybe dedication to a cause is more motivating than we thing. They have it...we don't.
"central tenet of President Obama’s approach to combating insurgencies"?
How about the "central tenet" of Bush's approach to the Middle East, bogging the nation down in TWO ruinous quagmires? And followed by Obama's policy of continuing this adventurist involvement in Libya, Egypt, Syria...?
WHY are US "leaderless" so utterly unable to learn from our history?
From Vietnam on, it's been the same... each president gets caught in a quagmire and the brass hats keep telling him that the "exit strategy" involved MORE spending and more death and destruction!
How about the "central tenet" of Bush's approach to the Middle East, bogging the nation down in TWO ruinous quagmires? And followed by Obama's policy of continuing this adventurist involvement in Libya, Egypt, Syria...?
WHY are US "leaderless" so utterly unable to learn from our history?
From Vietnam on, it's been the same... each president gets caught in a quagmire and the brass hats keep telling him that the "exit strategy" involved MORE spending and more death and destruction!
2
Whether Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan, these are American mercenary forces who are doing it for a check. Their hearts and minds are not into it, they are not going to win any tough battles, and they definitely will drop their weapons and return to their villages the minute U.S. taxpayer checks stop coming.
2
The basics of western military superiority is not fancy weapons and training, but unit cohesion and command-and-control. Officers give orders, and soldiers carry them out. At the top stands the commander in chief, who directs the general direction of the fighting.
An army of tribal warriors, where every soldier and officer decides what to do based on his own interests and connections, is not going to be very successful.
An army of tribal warriors, where every soldier and officer decides what to do based on his own interests and connections, is not going to be very successful.
2
Highly informative writing by Schmitt and Arango. All I can say is that we are demonstrating the consequences of Santayana's famous statement, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." It was impossible for us to stand up an effective army in South Vietnam, and here we are today.
The quote from the article, "But how thousands of Afghan Army, police and militia defenders could fare so poorly against a Taliban force that most local and military officials put only in the hundreds baffled and frustrated the Pentagon," could have come from a number of our past ventures.
From Bush and Cheney onward, we have failed to develop a strategy, let alone an effective one, in the modern Middle East that deals in asymmetric warfare. And yesterday we bombed a hospital.
There is no solution. For Iraq, it now looks like the Biden strategy was the correct one, a reason being that there is no other effective strategy. The condition in Afghanistan only demonstrates that the war in Iraq failed to deliver on its promises, resources better spent in Afghanistan. The result is that the U.S. will have to remain in the region for a long time, with no prognosis of success.
Just walking away feeds the fear that some other terrorist agent will arise from these areas to attack the U.S. But maintaining a presence in these countries doesn't seem to address threats to the U.S. directly, it only impedes terrorism through confusion. Maybe that's the best that we can hope for.
The quote from the article, "But how thousands of Afghan Army, police and militia defenders could fare so poorly against a Taliban force that most local and military officials put only in the hundreds baffled and frustrated the Pentagon," could have come from a number of our past ventures.
From Bush and Cheney onward, we have failed to develop a strategy, let alone an effective one, in the modern Middle East that deals in asymmetric warfare. And yesterday we bombed a hospital.
There is no solution. For Iraq, it now looks like the Biden strategy was the correct one, a reason being that there is no other effective strategy. The condition in Afghanistan only demonstrates that the war in Iraq failed to deliver on its promises, resources better spent in Afghanistan. The result is that the U.S. will have to remain in the region for a long time, with no prognosis of success.
Just walking away feeds the fear that some other terrorist agent will arise from these areas to attack the U.S. But maintaining a presence in these countries doesn't seem to address threats to the U.S. directly, it only impedes terrorism through confusion. Maybe that's the best that we can hope for.
I live in a community that has a heavy military base.
When I ask any returning personel about the experience in Afganistan, there is universal opinion that our efforts there are a complete waste of time and money.
Remember - these are our military supporters, not peaceniks.
One of my criteria for voting in the next presidential election will be a desire to extricate the U.S. from these repeated mistakes.
When I ask any returning personel about the experience in Afganistan, there is universal opinion that our efforts there are a complete waste of time and money.
Remember - these are our military supporters, not peaceniks.
One of my criteria for voting in the next presidential election will be a desire to extricate the U.S. from these repeated mistakes.
4
A more accurate headline should read:
Trillions in US Taxpayer Dollars fail to Deliver Value to US Taxpayers
Trillions in US Taxpayer Dollars fail to Deliver Value to US Taxpayers
4
The internet and communications revolution have made war obsolete. When these peoples had no idea what was on the other side conflict could be justified. Now those who might be motivated to lead and change just leave for Germany or Sweden or the US. I spent some years in AFG and Iraq and the number one goal of all the trainees I dealt with was to figure out how to get a visa and get out. It is one world now and our leaders still are thinking in terms of nation states.
2
Well said. And when they arrive at these "promised lands" they tend to often want to bring with the the failed cultural norms that made their point of origin such a mess - and, in the benighted name of tolerance and diversity, we encourage it. Absurd.
1
How long took it for democracy and good governance to take root in the west?
It takes far longer than the U.S. president and members of Congress have time in the office.
It is that and the 24/7 news cycle that makes the change seem impossible.
It takes far longer than the U.S. president and members of Congress have time in the office.
It is that and the 24/7 news cycle that makes the change seem impossible.
1
Reading this article, leaves no doubt in my mind that our economy me will implode soon. No foreign enemy or ISIS will destroy America, we are doing it to ourselves. To think that politicians think we are gutting DoD is laughable.
2
Everywhere we spend our billions what we've seen is an increase in brutal terrorist groups. Most likely, foreign fighters sponsored by the Americans are also in far greater danger for their relations with us.
We have so much to do here, not least with making all our schools high quality and safe, and providing states with money to meet their budget shortfalls and provide services and infrastructure improvement. We're losing the battle abroad, let's try to win some at home.
We have so much to do here, not least with making all our schools high quality and safe, and providing states with money to meet their budget shortfalls and provide services and infrastructure improvement. We're losing the battle abroad, let's try to win some at home.
2
Don't think those billions are being spent in Afghanistan. Our troops don't even have eye drops and face wipes to clean off the desert sands. As someone said during Watergate "just follow the money" to the U.S. And foreign companies that profit from military contracts.
1
My how our perception of our capabilities has lagged the reality of the outcomes.
Let's start with Korea. Then Vietnam. Then this mess in the Middle East. And of course the 'righteous war in Afghanistan', where we went to war with an entire country in pursuit of one man.
Thing is, willpower beats firepower. That's why we keep getting beat by 'lesser' powers.
Let's start with Korea. Then Vietnam. Then this mess in the Middle East. And of course the 'righteous war in Afghanistan', where we went to war with an entire country in pursuit of one man.
Thing is, willpower beats firepower. That's why we keep getting beat by 'lesser' powers.
1
There's a lot to be said to the argument that Mr. Obama's strategy can never succeed in the absence of a government that the people can support, rather than some proxy construct that we fashion then keep in power with our dollars and that the people regard as alien.
But there's also a lot to be said for the argument that one doesn't just wave a hand and create effective armies not infused by some religious fervor.
To be effective, national armies need generations of tradition, mature protocols for selecting leaders then training and grooming them. All that requires a lot of time. The stable democracies of the West have such armies, Russia and China have such armies -- but shattered, concocted "nations" simply don't, and we can't make up for that in a few years regardless of how many billions we squander in the attempt.
In the end, we need to determine how important relative stability is in a part of the world that still supplies much of the rest of the world with its energy. And how important to the world a nation such as Afghanistan, that provides the rest of the world so little despite its abundance of mineral resources, really is. If relative stability IS that important, then we're not going to get away with seeking to train local forces in a few years when all that can save them are mature armies. If it's not, then we may as well leave them to their fates, as what we're doing just wastes huge sums and delivers no value to anyone other than the hangers-on.
But there's also a lot to be said for the argument that one doesn't just wave a hand and create effective armies not infused by some religious fervor.
To be effective, national armies need generations of tradition, mature protocols for selecting leaders then training and grooming them. All that requires a lot of time. The stable democracies of the West have such armies, Russia and China have such armies -- but shattered, concocted "nations" simply don't, and we can't make up for that in a few years regardless of how many billions we squander in the attempt.
In the end, we need to determine how important relative stability is in a part of the world that still supplies much of the rest of the world with its energy. And how important to the world a nation such as Afghanistan, that provides the rest of the world so little despite its abundance of mineral resources, really is. If relative stability IS that important, then we're not going to get away with seeking to train local forces in a few years when all that can save them are mature armies. If it's not, then we may as well leave them to their fates, as what we're doing just wastes huge sums and delivers no value to anyone other than the hangers-on.
Don't settle for the US partisan view, but instead look at Ashraf Ghani's replacement of the governor of Kunduz in January of this year with Omar Safi, together with other officials, and the subsequent fallout from that decision.
The basis for the change in leadership was described as an anti-corruption effort, but the underlying cause may have been better described as an effort to replace the former corrupt officials with newer corrupt officials, but this is yet to be proven.
A contributing cause was the regional armed militias loyal to the displaced governor and his associates, who were being reduced in their incomes and influence by Ghani's presidential appointments. The error in Ghani's judgement and methods helps explain why there was virtually no intelligence at the executive level that an attack was forthcoming, and we should all be highly aware of the intel failure that this attack represented far more than the attack itself. perhaps.
Now, I know that mot of the respondents here are probably not interested in the true basis for the failure in Kunduz, but we would all be better served if we sought the facts before we make the judgments.
The basis for the change in leadership was described as an anti-corruption effort, but the underlying cause may have been better described as an effort to replace the former corrupt officials with newer corrupt officials, but this is yet to be proven.
A contributing cause was the regional armed militias loyal to the displaced governor and his associates, who were being reduced in their incomes and influence by Ghani's presidential appointments. The error in Ghani's judgement and methods helps explain why there was virtually no intelligence at the executive level that an attack was forthcoming, and we should all be highly aware of the intel failure that this attack represented far more than the attack itself. perhaps.
Now, I know that mot of the respondents here are probably not interested in the true basis for the failure in Kunduz, but we would all be better served if we sought the facts before we make the judgments.
During the Sixties, like millions of others, I marched in protest against the Vietnam War.
When that ugly war ended and Nixon was removed from office, I, like many young people, wanted to believe that massive dissent had something to do with that.
However, with the benefit of hindsight, I do not think the protests had anything to do with it.
Instead, I think the war ended because it was bankrupting the country.
Presumably, these wars are being shut down for the same reason.
But, whatever...I do not care why.
I just want the wars to stop.
Peace!
When that ugly war ended and Nixon was removed from office, I, like many young people, wanted to believe that massive dissent had something to do with that.
However, with the benefit of hindsight, I do not think the protests had anything to do with it.
Instead, I think the war ended because it was bankrupting the country.
Presumably, these wars are being shut down for the same reason.
But, whatever...I do not care why.
I just want the wars to stop.
Peace!
3
We gave up the fight too soon...Wall Street and the war profiteers won. Do you think they made GPS for our benefit so we can find our way to the nursing home or the WalMart pharmacy? Nope, but we like having the toys developed for the military, don't we? Including the guns that are used to kill children and old ladies at church. Instead of watching HSN, we should be marching again with the young people who need our support.
Considering our failure to "win" these wars perhaps we should consider which candidates would take us into another one when we vote for the next president.
1
What is most remarkable about American attempts to train Arab and other Middle Eastern forces is our failure to look around and see they already know how to fight without our training. In Afghanistan it should always have been clear to us that Afghan forces were not going to fight out of any sense of loyalty to something as amorphous as the Afghan government. In the Middle East the willingness to fight depends on loyalty to a tribal, military ethnic, or religious leader. The U.S. destabilized the Middle East with its military invasion of Iraq, and now makes the mistakes of thinking native forces can be trained to support whatever the U.S. would prefer them to support. It isn't going to happen no matter how much money we continue wasting.
4
Let us see here. Full-scale invasions don't work. Hired and trained security forces don't work. Drones work until they kill thousands of innocent civilians. Maybe, just maybe, we shouldn't be there, at least not in a military capacity. Just a thought.
3
It is hard to teach people to kill, especially their kin! No wonder!
2
On the contrary, they kill each other quite readily and with apparent ease and abandon! That is part of the problem. The national name, such as Afghan or Iraqi, is less important than one's tribal affiliation, loyalty to a local "warlord" (a truly bizarre anachronism in 2015), religious sect, etc. Don't pretend that their peace loving ways and our "teach[ing] people to kill...their kin" is in any way the problem.
"On the contrary, they kill each other quite readily and with apparent ease and abandon!"
Unfortunately this is also what we Americans did with ease and abandon and cruelty during our civil war.
Unfortunately this is also what we Americans did with ease and abandon and cruelty during our civil war.
Poor President Obama.
He hears the voices of Americans for a few years now, namely, - Stay out of the Arab world and Middle East. Extract ourselves from an area of the world that for as long as anyone alive can remember has been torn with strife and medevil societal progress.
So instead of sending our money and treasures, risking our futures, he attempts to fund these weak kneed nationals without backbones to prove they deserve democracy and freedom.
Clearly, they don't have a national will.
That is not a US problem.
Therefore, unfortunately, everything reverts back to Darwinism, namely, survival of the fittest.
He hears the voices of Americans for a few years now, namely, - Stay out of the Arab world and Middle East. Extract ourselves from an area of the world that for as long as anyone alive can remember has been torn with strife and medevil societal progress.
So instead of sending our money and treasures, risking our futures, he attempts to fund these weak kneed nationals without backbones to prove they deserve democracy and freedom.
Clearly, they don't have a national will.
That is not a US problem.
Therefore, unfortunately, everything reverts back to Darwinism, namely, survival of the fittest.
2
If people in these countries are not willing to fight for their freedom and democracy Obama certainly shouldn't allow them to immigrate here to obtain it.
There is a reason they are not going to places like Russia, China or other middle eastern countries.
There is a reason they are not going to places like Russia, China or other middle eastern countries.
6
Billions and no congressional hearings on such huge spendings, but Planned Parenthood is in the line of fire.
Something is rotten in the United States.
Something is rotten in the United States.
10
You mean in the United States of Halliburton and Black Water? Why would they want women to have family planning services when their sons and daughters make such good sacrifices to the gods of war.
Puppet governments never work.
1
Not true! What about Cheney and 'W'?
It works here.
Has it occurred to anyone that, deep down, the Iraqi and Afghan soldiers don't really want to kill their own countrymen? That is, the regular army are not properly motivated to undertake the awful, bloody work required to rid one's own country of native fighters. Furthermore, they don't want to die doing it.
On the surface, it seems reasonable to think that a young recruit would feel motivated against an insurgent force that threatens such havoc, but to kill and die for it?
Regular Afghans and Iraqis alike are trapped in civil wars they do not want. Most of Syria's 20 million or so remaining inhabitants feel the same way. This will not be solved by throwing money and training at the problem.
On the surface, it seems reasonable to think that a young recruit would feel motivated against an insurgent force that threatens such havoc, but to kill and die for it?
Regular Afghans and Iraqis alike are trapped in civil wars they do not want. Most of Syria's 20 million or so remaining inhabitants feel the same way. This will not be solved by throwing money and training at the problem.
3
Hey, President Obama: Vlad's got this. Please declare victory and bring everyone home for some southern border patrolling, urban policing, and VA staffing. And don't forget to tell Bibi good luck!
7
AMEN.
It is long past time for the US to withdraw its soldiers and money from the ME. Candidate Obama said he would do this (except in Afghanistan, the "right" war), but he has gotten us in even deeper than Bush.
As for the never ending stream of refugees to the West, all young men of conscription age who aren't willing to fight for their freedom in their own countries should be banned from making an asylum claim.
As for the never ending stream of refugees to the West, all young men of conscription age who aren't willing to fight for their freedom in their own countries should be banned from making an asylum claim.
7
This fits the popular definition of insanity "Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result." It's also a classic case of throwing good money after bad. Those billions could have provided free higher education. Upgraded our infrastructure and created jobs. Financed healthcare for all. But, instead, they've lined the pockets of defense contractors, killed and wounded hundreds of thousands of soldiers and civilians, and destroyed a whole region of the world. And members of Congress and presidential candidates continue to call for more. Our military budget already eats up 56% of federal spending. Enough. It's time to learn from our mistakes and change strategies. And priorities.
8
It also fits the popular definition of inanity. But let's watch some Sunday football and forget about it.
This is an important article. Could this turn into a series on how money is spent in general on both foreign aid and aid and training in the US? How much is being spent on training and equipping our police to act like the armies against their own people we have unsuccessfully trained elsewhere and how has this been succeeding here? How many billions have been spent training the US poor and middle class to avoid deeper poverty and hold onto successes? What are the beliefs behind such successes and failures here? And what ever happened to the missing millions shipped to Iraq and then totally unaccounted for? Was the trail ever found? Do similar things happen here involving substantial amounts of money as well?
2
@Freyda
Excellent points. A series such as you describe would be more than enlightening.
Excellent points. A series such as you describe would be more than enlightening.
As noted in this article, there is no parallel effort to assure leadership training and unit integrity which requires either political or cultural support. In contrast, American culture is self-governing and as such leadership can emerge, as it did in our Revolution.
Just training the troops does not an army make. The unit training model, starting with the OSS and later the Special Forces in Vietnam illustrate the point. The French Resistance was motivated and self-governing; the South Vietnamese were much less so.
Too often we are viewed as the invader, not the liberator, who in the long run has to be OF the culture or society in question, not an outsider. You cannot export democracy wholesale through "regime change", only plant the seed and let it grow in its own time. You lead by example. Let’s get our house in order.
Just training the troops does not an army make. The unit training model, starting with the OSS and later the Special Forces in Vietnam illustrate the point. The French Resistance was motivated and self-governing; the South Vietnamese were much less so.
Too often we are viewed as the invader, not the liberator, who in the long run has to be OF the culture or society in question, not an outsider. You cannot export democracy wholesale through "regime change", only plant the seed and let it grow in its own time. You lead by example. Let’s get our house in order.
14
When will we realize that our biggest enemy...the one that has hurt us the most, hurt our economy, our standing in the world and destroyed our country from the inside out, is the damned military ? We are the only industrialized nation with no free health care or college for our citizens...too much money...but we can spend 57 cents of every dollar on invasion, death and destruction so that billionaires can become multi=billionaires.
10
At the outset of war in the Middle East in 2003, this was predicted. Why on earth did we think that we would succeed where others before us have failed miserably? Ego? The culture and theocratic governments are not amenable to change, period. We have wasted our country's resources both in terms of dollars and more importantly in terms of lives destroyed or snuffed out. We have ensnared the people in the Middle East in a perpetual war zone, in the name of Democracy. There is no winning strategy, there is only more of the same. Enough.
7
These politicians are only motivated by money and greed.
They made the mistake of assuming that everyone else is, too.
They made the mistake of assuming that everyone else is, too.
4
Time to withdraw and look after ourselves. Time to stop bleeding our country with wars that are not ours. Time to mind our own business, which we don't do well.
9
Our enemies don't seem to have this problem with the individuals they are training. More than likely it's because they are fighting for a cause they believe in.
People in these counties apparently want the governments they have. The majority do not want or are not willing to fight for freedom and democracy. Western countries make it easy for them by allowing immigrants to flee versus fight for their beliefs.
You can't ignore people or countries who are continually trying to attack you, kill you or are equipping and training others to do it for them. You certainly don't give them $150 billion dollars and allow them to develop nuclear weapons as Obama has done with Iran.
When you have individuals who are willing to die to impose their beliefs on others you have to be willing to do whatever it takes to defend and protect yourself.
People in these counties apparently want the governments they have. The majority do not want or are not willing to fight for freedom and democracy. Western countries make it easy for them by allowing immigrants to flee versus fight for their beliefs.
You can't ignore people or countries who are continually trying to attack you, kill you or are equipping and training others to do it for them. You certainly don't give them $150 billion dollars and allow them to develop nuclear weapons as Obama has done with Iran.
When you have individuals who are willing to die to impose their beliefs on others you have to be willing to do whatever it takes to defend and protect yourself.
3
Corrupt political leaders (I.e. Hamid Karzai and his suitcases full of US cash) and military officers that flee at first contact with the enemy. Small wonder average soldiers have no stomach for standing and fighting.
6
So who's in charge here? The buck stops where?
2
Iraq's former Prime Minister Maliki inflated the number of regular troops that existed so that the U.S. paid more to support phantom troops. Money going to pay for ghostly troops "disappeared". No one was charged for grand theft.
You can bring the horse to water but you can not force it to drink. The U.S. policy of supporting local forces with training and equipment, albeit well-intented, has failed. The greater failure draws attention on the policy for continued involvement in the middle east when oil prices are below recent historic levels (~$45/bk) and reflect global demand-supply - which is not tight. In other words, U.S. interests in the Middle East have changed from oil dependency to energy independence.
The unstated Iraq sentiment of diving that country into Sunni, Kurd and Shiite states is a good idea. ISIL can have its Desert Caliphate with a few cities and towns thrown in. After-all, they are no worse that the Saudi Arabian regime that beheads its citizens for have sex out of wedlock; cuts-off hands of petty thieves and finances ISIL and other Islamic extremists in the Middle East and in western nations.
In future, it may be wise to focus on economic sanctions than sending in military trainers, equipment and billion-dollar payrolls to support the political-military complex of these backward nomadic civilizations intoxicated on oil wealth and western luxury while, at the same time, foster and protect spoiled inheritors of wealth who finance terrorists.
You can bring the horse to water but you can not force it to drink. The U.S. policy of supporting local forces with training and equipment, albeit well-intented, has failed. The greater failure draws attention on the policy for continued involvement in the middle east when oil prices are below recent historic levels (~$45/bk) and reflect global demand-supply - which is not tight. In other words, U.S. interests in the Middle East have changed from oil dependency to energy independence.
The unstated Iraq sentiment of diving that country into Sunni, Kurd and Shiite states is a good idea. ISIL can have its Desert Caliphate with a few cities and towns thrown in. After-all, they are no worse that the Saudi Arabian regime that beheads its citizens for have sex out of wedlock; cuts-off hands of petty thieves and finances ISIL and other Islamic extremists in the Middle East and in western nations.
In future, it may be wise to focus on economic sanctions than sending in military trainers, equipment and billion-dollar payrolls to support the political-military complex of these backward nomadic civilizations intoxicated on oil wealth and western luxury while, at the same time, foster and protect spoiled inheritors of wealth who finance terrorists.
1
The starred comments here are exceptional--a failed strategy (that has failed before) that has cost us billions and billions, with foreign trainees and their officers--mostly their officers and puppet administrators--pocketing as much of the money as they can. Meanwhile at home students are forced to pile up debts just to finish their educations. Give us a comparison of what college education would have cost these students if these funds would have been spent here. My guess is a small percentage of the funds wasted spent at home would have meant free tuition for most students.
It's not too late to change this. Routinely compare expenditures for foreign force-building with what we spend on education here, just as we should be comparing expenditures for the elderly on what we spend for minors. Throw in massive tax breaks for the rich. Remember, children can't vote.
We need to bolster our democracy at home first by setting our priorities right.
It's not too late to change this. Routinely compare expenditures for foreign force-building with what we spend on education here, just as we should be comparing expenditures for the elderly on what we spend for minors. Throw in massive tax breaks for the rich. Remember, children can't vote.
We need to bolster our democracy at home first by setting our priorities right.
1
When the article says that "the military" is training these soldiers od foreign countries, who exactly in the military is doing the training-members of the armed forces or contractors? My fear it is the latter because success, for contractors, is only measured by the amount of money that they receive and not the end results.
1
Why does this insanity continue? Keeps the arms dealers happy? Safeguard our energy supplies in the Middle East? Inertia? No good answers here.
It seems our rulers want to control the world, given all our military bases abroad and it also seems that this is an impossible task. Wisdom suggests that we need to take care of our own needs and drop world rule. Except for the 1% and their gated communities, our country is not doing well. Time to pull back.
It seems our rulers want to control the world, given all our military bases abroad and it also seems that this is an impossible task. Wisdom suggests that we need to take care of our own needs and drop world rule. Except for the 1% and their gated communities, our country is not doing well. Time to pull back.
5
Sorry but this is not an Obama policy -- it is an American military procedure dating from the last century, hardened by our standard bureaucratic 'this is the only was we can think about Them'. Obama cannot be expected to go against the grain in every single dimension in which it has been needed. War-mongers on his right, anti-war-mongers on his left, what can such a leader do but continuing some of the perpetually failing policies of the past. Arming and otherwise paying besieged regime remnants hoping they can continue our perpetually poorly thought foreign policy is simply as American as apple pie.
Let me summarize: to run this nation, one has to make some concessions to the milieu ... which is seldom very intelligent when foreign strife is involved. This is apparently due to internal national paranoia and ethnocentrism.
Let me summarize: to run this nation, one has to make some concessions to the milieu ... which is seldom very intelligent when foreign strife is involved. This is apparently due to internal national paranoia and ethnocentrism.
2
This article fails to address the elephant in the room. The same day that the "superior" US military capabilities accidentally bomb an international hospital whose coordinates had ben provided to NATO, it should come as no surprise that the US has been unable to buy military successes from others. Similarly, how can one expect the US Army to successfully train others do what they have been incapable of doing themselves. American readers should also remember that every single American intervention since Iran has backfired and only worsen the situation and created a bigger mess for others to address. Iran, Iraq … The instability across the region is a direct consequence of the failed US foreign policy and incompetent military. It's easy to break something. And then what. Wherever the U.S. Army has intervened over the last five decades, chaos and mayhem has ensued. I suppose a confirmation of the older adage, if you can't do it, teach it
2
This is what happens when we feel we need to do "something." If we do nothing, the chorus immediately chants "leading from behind." But no one is willing to put American boots on the ground (which has, in fact proved to be ineffective in the long run in every case since Vietnam, since ultimately the Americans return home, leaving the local insurgents to pick up where they left off). Thus the only option left is to throw away money "training" or arming forces which we hope will do what we won't. Unfortunately they won't either.
My thoughts - let's hear from the candidates. What voter would not want to know the position of each presidential candidate on these issues?
2
We are spending money on training because we have to try something. Money is cheaper than blood, and blood will be required if we demand the best chance of achieving results. Alternatively, we can just keep our people and resources at home and hope for the best. We tried that at least twice in history, and ended up with two world wars.
4
Well, I guess that is one way to look at history, but I think your analysis/conclusion is way off the mark and way too simplistic!
1
Why don't we just go with the world war.
The idea that we can export democracy to the people living under dictatorial rule in the Mid East is ludicrous. Yet our administration, after 6 years of failure -- following the failures of its predecessor -- still acts as if it is possible.
Invariably, what were hailed in the American media as simple uprisings by oppressed populations were actually revolts actively encouraged, financed, indeed organized by our agents, directed by the misguided belief by our administration that we had a duty to "free the peoples of the world” -- further, that doing so would create modern states that would adore us for our gift of freedom.
These are people who have no concept of what self-government entails, of the responsibilities it imposes, the need for conciliation and inclusion. They have never had any exposure to a social structure under which they experienced such obligations. They understand only being ruled. No amount of “education” will change that. Destroy their rulers and the result is, invariably, chaos. Chaos is what ISIS and its brethren feed upon. America’s policy towards Mid East tyrants created ISIS.
The only strong Mid East government is an autocratic one. Our only hope is that it be one friendly to us -- even if that "friendship" is bought and paid for in arms and direct support, as in today's Egypt.
We continue to elect internationally naive leaders, leaders who refuse to learn, who persist in their naivety in the face of overwhelming failure. That must stop.
Invariably, what were hailed in the American media as simple uprisings by oppressed populations were actually revolts actively encouraged, financed, indeed organized by our agents, directed by the misguided belief by our administration that we had a duty to "free the peoples of the world” -- further, that doing so would create modern states that would adore us for our gift of freedom.
These are people who have no concept of what self-government entails, of the responsibilities it imposes, the need for conciliation and inclusion. They have never had any exposure to a social structure under which they experienced such obligations. They understand only being ruled. No amount of “education” will change that. Destroy their rulers and the result is, invariably, chaos. Chaos is what ISIS and its brethren feed upon. America’s policy towards Mid East tyrants created ISIS.
The only strong Mid East government is an autocratic one. Our only hope is that it be one friendly to us -- even if that "friendship" is bought and paid for in arms and direct support, as in today's Egypt.
We continue to elect internationally naive leaders, leaders who refuse to learn, who persist in their naivety in the face of overwhelming failure. That must stop.
30
How about the lack of conciliation, inclusion or common sense in our own government? A friend, who works as a contractor for NASA, is supposed to present papers at two important international meetings to be held soon in the US. He and his colleagues can't book flights or hotels because of the likelihood that the Republicans will shut down the US government and its funding to protest federal dollars for Planned Parenthood, which provides health care and family planning services to poor women. Every government agency has already had its activities put on hold because of this threat.
When the US government isn't paralyzed by senseless extremists, can perhaps justifiably complain about Middle Easterners .
When the US government isn't paralyzed by senseless extremists, can perhaps justifiably complain about Middle Easterners .
Can anyone recall an Obama success in foreign policy? Maybe time for another "reset"?
3
considering the problems he inherited and faced, it has not proven a disaster.
This policy, in the public relations-driven self-interest of saving American lives (see "drone warfare"), has had the incredibly detrimental effect of arming and training the world's disaffected young men.
I know it sounds like a cruel joke, but just imagine if all of those billions had instead been used for educating young people everywhere (including better educating young people here in the US.
How do women put up with the violent impulses of men?
I know it sounds like a cruel joke, but just imagine if all of those billions had instead been used for educating young people everywhere (including better educating young people here in the US.
How do women put up with the violent impulses of men?
3
The goal of expanding our reach, as expressed by Pres. Obama at West Point, needs to be challenged. At most we need to have a world where it is safe to conduct business and live in health. This does not require us to expand our reach.
Wouldnt it be easier and more cost effective to spend money on building hospitals and schools than on military misadventures?
Wouldnt it be easier and more cost effective to spend money on building hospitals and schools than on military misadventures?
1
I get the feeling we need to start acting like China while waste billions of dollars and getting hated around the world. The Chinese on the other hand are building up nations and infrastructures around the world maybe we need to take a page from their playbook and utilize it. It would make for a better world for us Americans and the world alike.
2
Why are we, American taxpayers paying for this.
The principal beneficiaries are the oil conglomerates from China, France, South Korea and elsewhere who are operating in Iraq.
Rummy said, these would contribute to the cost of military campaigns that made their 25 year pumping contracts possible.
None of them paid us back for the trillions we spent on the 14 years wars.
What Iraq ends up looking like is a bunch of old wealthy men and their oil companies lending the US military and intel to other old wealthy men and their oil companies, as a favor amongst un-gentlemen, because they can.
But we get stuck with the tab.
To say nothing of the thousands of our people killed their, or the tens of thousands injured in ways that wreck the rest of their lives, or the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi who died there.
We are seeing the end of the age of oil and it is ugly.
Can someone at least employ a bit of common sense.
The principal beneficiaries are the oil conglomerates from China, France, South Korea and elsewhere who are operating in Iraq.
Rummy said, these would contribute to the cost of military campaigns that made their 25 year pumping contracts possible.
None of them paid us back for the trillions we spent on the 14 years wars.
What Iraq ends up looking like is a bunch of old wealthy men and their oil companies lending the US military and intel to other old wealthy men and their oil companies, as a favor amongst un-gentlemen, because they can.
But we get stuck with the tab.
To say nothing of the thousands of our people killed their, or the tens of thousands injured in ways that wreck the rest of their lives, or the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi who died there.
We are seeing the end of the age of oil and it is ugly.
Can someone at least employ a bit of common sense.
3
Of course as much as one wishes to just walk away from such a problem (one that takes lives and money!) we just can't forget about it. The powers in that area don't wish to just live and let live, many are committed to forcing all to live as they do -- and quite frankly, they live in a way which is incompatible with the values we live by here.
5
Do you live there or do you live here?
There are no words to describe the shame of the Obama presidency.
Over the years, when we learn that Obama's failed nation building strategy was a product of sheer imagination, arrogance and political cowardice...when we read about how hundreds of military leaders quit, were removed or forced out of the US military because they were disgusted by Obama's horrific failures, it will be a stain on American History that will make the Nixon presidency, and LBJ's second term look small.
Obama's entire foreign policy was about saving face. He was afraid to be the peacenik liberal antiwar progressive he was elected to be, because he thought it would make him politically vulnerable from the center right.
So Obama continued a failed strategy, throwing billions of dollars away on something that not only wasn't working, but that Obama ignored as military leaders were pleading with him that these rebel trainings were going nowhere.
Obama allowed the status quo because he knew the media wasn't going to call him on it. Even now, this watered down NYT article doesn't hold Obama accountable, it merely mentions him in passing like a mile marker on a 300 mile drive.
Our military leaders knew Obama's strategy wasn't working. They told him it wasn't working. Obama and the establishment news media sat on this for years, waiting until it was too late to recover lost billions and American lives Obama squandered on his version of nation building. Obama is a disgrace. So is the American press.
Over the years, when we learn that Obama's failed nation building strategy was a product of sheer imagination, arrogance and political cowardice...when we read about how hundreds of military leaders quit, were removed or forced out of the US military because they were disgusted by Obama's horrific failures, it will be a stain on American History that will make the Nixon presidency, and LBJ's second term look small.
Obama's entire foreign policy was about saving face. He was afraid to be the peacenik liberal antiwar progressive he was elected to be, because he thought it would make him politically vulnerable from the center right.
So Obama continued a failed strategy, throwing billions of dollars away on something that not only wasn't working, but that Obama ignored as military leaders were pleading with him that these rebel trainings were going nowhere.
Obama allowed the status quo because he knew the media wasn't going to call him on it. Even now, this watered down NYT article doesn't hold Obama accountable, it merely mentions him in passing like a mile marker on a 300 mile drive.
Our military leaders knew Obama's strategy wasn't working. They told him it wasn't working. Obama and the establishment news media sat on this for years, waiting until it was too late to recover lost billions and American lives Obama squandered on his version of nation building. Obama is a disgrace. So is the American press.
9
And which of the 2016 candidates will correct this erroneous trend which as you well know can easily be documented back through JFK's administration?
2
I wasn't alive during the JFK administration, so I will just blame Obama's failures on Obama.
I'm pretty sure Trump can fix this.
I'm pretty sure Trump can fix this.
1
Sorry, but the President of the Democrats does not have a clue about how to manage people, having never had any experience at it before you elected him your president. From his administration patronage-filled with similar Harvard-elite ideologues to the military the country is foundering, leaderless. Hopefully Putin will slow his march but probably not. Other dictators are filling the Obama vacuum. 14 or so months left of this most-disastrous presidency in U. S. history.
3
OK Ted, you want the United States to commit four or five hundred thousand troops (not your son or daughter, of course) to Irak and a similar number (maybe, because of size, a couple of hundred thousand more) to Afghanistan. That should be the minimum to prop up the governments we set up. With the Putin thing we could also declare war on Russia and dust off all our missiles. We will certainly show we are not "leaderless!"
President Obama is the President of the United States of America. If by some reason you don't acknowledge him as your president, you are saying you're not an American.
As much as I disliked many of the policies of Nixon, Reagan, and both Bushes, I was never so contemptible an American to refer to them as anything other than our President.
I think you should be ashamed of yourself.
As much as I disliked many of the policies of Nixon, Reagan, and both Bushes, I was never so contemptible an American to refer to them as anything other than our President.
I think you should be ashamed of yourself.
1
When the U.S. has ended a war or "military action," when there are no more "boots on the ground," we should leave. Period.
1
These authors et al have validated the facts of the Middle East.
Since Alexander the Great westerners have learned that Middle Eastern society stands upon honor, hospitality and revenge.
Democracy is not mentioned. It is not their culture.
For millennia their leaders have learned that honor and hospitality, though much revered, won't control their society. For that they employ violence to the degree required.
But violence by outsiders is a non starter unless used in quantities which essentially annihilate the population.
On political and economic grounds the West has been hesitant to go there.
But war on the cheap has historically failed and frustrated.
Obama is right to stand back and let them fight it out in their own way much like a controlled burn in a forest too crowded for resources.
Fire is ugly, but better than jumping in the middle of it with a garden hose because fire does not play nice.
Since Alexander the Great westerners have learned that Middle Eastern society stands upon honor, hospitality and revenge.
Democracy is not mentioned. It is not their culture.
For millennia their leaders have learned that honor and hospitality, though much revered, won't control their society. For that they employ violence to the degree required.
But violence by outsiders is a non starter unless used in quantities which essentially annihilate the population.
On political and economic grounds the West has been hesitant to go there.
But war on the cheap has historically failed and frustrated.
Obama is right to stand back and let them fight it out in their own way much like a controlled burn in a forest too crowded for resources.
Fire is ugly, but better than jumping in the middle of it with a garden hose because fire does not play nice.
2
". . . calling into question the effectiveness of the tens of billions of dollars spent by the United States on foreign military training programs . . ."
I prefer the Northeast Corridor Maglev Train pipe dream to the foreign military training pipe dream:
Backers of a Maglev Train Hope to Outpace Acela in the Northeast Corridor
"At a total estimated cost of $100 billion, critics say a maglev train on the East Coast is little more than a pipe dream. But that has not stopped the investors from pushing the project."
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/23/business/backers-of-a-maglev-train-hop...
I prefer the Northeast Corridor Maglev Train pipe dream to the foreign military training pipe dream:
Backers of a Maglev Train Hope to Outpace Acela in the Northeast Corridor
"At a total estimated cost of $100 billion, critics say a maglev train on the East Coast is little more than a pipe dream. But that has not stopped the investors from pushing the project."
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/23/business/backers-of-a-maglev-train-hop...
The idea of training local insurgents/soldiers to fight for their own causes doesn't seem to work, in the middle east, or perhaps anywhere.
It is long past time to give up on this program.
I prefer the idea of doing nothing at this point. Let these countries fend for themselves. I think it is time for the US to admit that it doesm't understand how to help thiese countries and to move on.
We should strive to maintain remain energy independent and move more off fossil fuels and let Iraq and Syria be in charge of their own wars.
It is long past time to give up on this program.
I prefer the idea of doing nothing at this point. Let these countries fend for themselves. I think it is time for the US to admit that it doesm't understand how to help thiese countries and to move on.
We should strive to maintain remain energy independent and move more off fossil fuels and let Iraq and Syria be in charge of their own wars.
Local fighters in this region are not interested in creating a liberal democracy with tolerance for those who are different than themselves. Local fighters are interested in crushing their adversaries so they can impose their religious practices and political will on those who are different.
Any energy (forces, training, cash) put into this area by outsiders will get redirected toward these local goals. Free will rules, and the sooner our political leaders realize we cannot change what the local fighters want, the sooner they will realize we need to get out.
Any energy (forces, training, cash) put into this area by outsiders will get redirected toward these local goals. Free will rules, and the sooner our political leaders realize we cannot change what the local fighters want, the sooner they will realize we need to get out.
2
We need to stop spending our money on other countries, and take care of the millions of our own citizens who live Third World lives right here in the USA.
2
We have been spending ridiculous amounts of money over and over again on a clearly failed local troop training strategy since Vietnam. If we spent this money on feeding people or otherwise improving lives, at home and abroad, we would have a much better society and possibly better allies. We must stop intervening militarily and concentrate on aiding people. Hamas and Hezbollah and even ISIS spend money on improving people's lives.We only alienate the world by our military conquests, including training "troops."
1
No matter all the training an outside party can provide you can't create the motivation for people in a country to organize in a constructive way and defend themselves. The religious and cultural values of the people in the Middle East don't provide the basic motivation for people to organize governments that can bring together different tribes and religious sects where they can compromise for the good of all. As a result there is no motivation for the common defense of the people that only a government can provide. It's true that Obama has spent US funds in vain on this effort but its better than the alternative of committing US troops.
16
Surely an element in the failures of the US approach, and its repetition in the face of obvious failure, is a deeply corrupt contracting system that feed billions to favored contractors who hire former US military personnel at inflated salaries. Our now permanent war fighting is not primarily geared to winning but to support a certain very expensive US military way of life. If the object was to winning you'd have to ask how the opposition gets by without multi-billion dollar training programs. Even scarier from a budgetary point of view, you might conclude our military doesn't belong there at all.
2
If after all this time, the Afghani soldiers can't look to leaders of their own to inspire, encourage and give them something to fight for, there is probably nothing America can do to get the Afghani army to successfully wage a war against the Taliban.
2
The entirety of our foreign policy in the Middle East is dysfunctional because the only effective solution is a coalition of US supervised boots-on-the-ground (or some form of concrete presence of mulit-national force capable of policing insurgents and jihadists). But in terms of our domestic politics that is an untenable position or stance. We are becoming little more than a government sanctioned arms dealer.
1
Is there an Afghanistan to fight and die for? Is there an Iraq to fight and die for? Aren't these "countries" just constructs hobbled together on a map by Allied interests after the war to end all wars?
Both "countries" are just a conglomeration of tribes and extended families and in order to make them right we need anthropologists not politicians. Or we could just leave them alone to fight out their differences.
Both "countries" are just a conglomeration of tribes and extended families and in order to make them right we need anthropologists not politicians. Or we could just leave them alone to fight out their differences.
5
I don't have a a Problem with Obama's strategy , I have a problem with his lack of business naiveté to know when not to put good money after bad.It should not have taken billions to determine the people we were training did not have the resolve to carry the battle without the American forces at their elbow.Once we recognized this, we should heave taken our losses, & realized our plan did not work, & left Iraq, Afghanistan to defend themselves, Spilling more american blood is not warranted.
3
Failure, in different degrees, has been reported for years. We keep doing the same thing: trying to train people in foreign lands to fight in a military force modeled after our own. It hasn't worked well. It's not working now. It's likely it's never going to work.
Why?
A basic assumption is wrong somewhere and I think it's the character of the people we're dealing with abroad: despite our own fractiousness and deep political divisions, Americans share a sense of country and citizenship that does not exist in most of the places mentioned in the article: places that are third world areas, randomly divided into "countries" by retreating Imperialists (largely, the Brits), where tribe and sect - and of course a religion that is also a political system - vastly outweigh the concept of a nation-state. Of course there is disappointment when the trainees, who in many cases come from basically medieval societies, don't make effective modern national soldiers. As the article mentions, most can't even read.
As an actor might ask, "What's my motivation?"
Let's look into trying more sociology and less military. Ugly as the prospect seems, there may be no amount of money, no amount of US effort, no length of time that is going to work to help ease what in the big picture is an agonizing and very rapid transition, within a couple of generations or less, from the ancient world to the modern world. We're trying to drag them kicking and screaming and it's not working.
Why?
A basic assumption is wrong somewhere and I think it's the character of the people we're dealing with abroad: despite our own fractiousness and deep political divisions, Americans share a sense of country and citizenship that does not exist in most of the places mentioned in the article: places that are third world areas, randomly divided into "countries" by retreating Imperialists (largely, the Brits), where tribe and sect - and of course a religion that is also a political system - vastly outweigh the concept of a nation-state. Of course there is disappointment when the trainees, who in many cases come from basically medieval societies, don't make effective modern national soldiers. As the article mentions, most can't even read.
As an actor might ask, "What's my motivation?"
Let's look into trying more sociology and less military. Ugly as the prospect seems, there may be no amount of money, no amount of US effort, no length of time that is going to work to help ease what in the big picture is an agonizing and very rapid transition, within a couple of generations or less, from the ancient world to the modern world. We're trying to drag them kicking and screaming and it's not working.
2
From the two World Wars through Vietnam, Afghanistan/Soviet, Iraq, Afganistan/Taliban and Africa, the American intervention was only successful where there was a clear resolve on the domestic front against an 'evil' and local support for a sincere American savior. Absence of any one of the two ingredients was and will remain a cause of failure.
Our biggest singular problem in the Muslim world is a perceived lack of sincerity. They are unable to reconcile our support for Israeli aggressions and an abusive totalitarian Saudi regime with any of the lofty slogans used by past or present US governments.
Our biggest singular problem in the Muslim world is a perceived lack of sincerity. They are unable to reconcile our support for Israeli aggressions and an abusive totalitarian Saudi regime with any of the lofty slogans used by past or present US governments.
1
We need to get out now. The free market has spoken, they don't want what we are selling.
5
Actually the free market in weaponry, in international arms sales, is thriving.
A need is manufactured and profitably fulfilled, thereby funding lobbyists to urge more of the same until your grandchildren's taxes will be paying for same, all perfectly and reasonably justified by a propaganda machine that cranks out patriotic defense drivel for Americans even as it creates rather than solves conflicts abroad.
It may not serve your interests, but neither you nor they are of any consequence to those who are making money here.
A need is manufactured and profitably fulfilled, thereby funding lobbyists to urge more of the same until your grandchildren's taxes will be paying for same, all perfectly and reasonably justified by a propaganda machine that cranks out patriotic defense drivel for Americans even as it creates rather than solves conflicts abroad.
It may not serve your interests, but neither you nor they are of any consequence to those who are making money here.
1
It's not hard to see why the forces fail. They are proxies of a foreign power seeking to impose its will against the wishes of the larger population. When you invade a country on spurious grounds, the locals who rally to you tend not to be real patriots. Rather they are usually crooks, thieves and opportunists. They will be happy to take your money, guns and training, but when you send them into combat they are going to crumple like a cheap suit.
These articles on the wasted billions on the latest US military misadventures are taking on the hopeless sameness we have seen evolving with the pieces that inevitably follow the mass shootings. Here's a suggestion. Do some articles tracking into what military/security/training/nation building contractors pockets the wasted trillions of the last decade and a half went. Where is the naming and shaming of the private sector entities who so grossly failed to come even near the completion goals they signed on for? Where? Why no detailed articles on how fat the military industrial complex has grown under this policy of permanent war and how they lobby to keep the party going. It's not hard get the contracts make some phone calls. Publish the numbers. Then track the movement of senior military personnel through the revolving door that takes them from public service to a well paid perch with the MIC for playing ball when they were in government. Where are these stories?
14
"American-trained forces face different problems in each place... but what [they] have in common... is poor leadership, a lack of will and the need to function in the face of intractable political problems with little support."
Translation: we are viewed as an invader, are not wanted, and can only attract unprincipled opportunists who have no popular support to our side. Our military hypes these losers as principled idealists, who merely lack leadership skills, because to admit the truth would be to admit we are overextended and committed to fighting losing wars we never should have started. All because our foreign policy has been dominated by chicken hawks and war profiteers. But good luck getting the NYTimes to do anything other than peddle the usual excuses, as this article does.
I'd give this comment about a 50-50 chance of even being published.
Translation: we are viewed as an invader, are not wanted, and can only attract unprincipled opportunists who have no popular support to our side. Our military hypes these losers as principled idealists, who merely lack leadership skills, because to admit the truth would be to admit we are overextended and committed to fighting losing wars we never should have started. All because our foreign policy has been dominated by chicken hawks and war profiteers. But good luck getting the NYTimes to do anything other than peddle the usual excuses, as this article does.
I'd give this comment about a 50-50 chance of even being published.
4
The Middle East is the most unstable, dangerous region on the world map.
Is the Middle East better off now than seven years ago before Barack Obama? Fifteen years ago before George W. Bush?
Maybe the projection of American military power is not such an intelligent foreign policy? Fifty-two thousands American died defending the vanities of incompetent Presidents in Vietnam. Not one of those poor soldiers died defending America's borders.
Perhaps isolationism was given a very bad name before World War II when America was a congenial democracy concentrating on serving the needs of its own hard-working citizens?
Is the Middle East better off now than seven years ago before Barack Obama? Fifteen years ago before George W. Bush?
Maybe the projection of American military power is not such an intelligent foreign policy? Fifty-two thousands American died defending the vanities of incompetent Presidents in Vietnam. Not one of those poor soldiers died defending America's borders.
Perhaps isolationism was given a very bad name before World War II when America was a congenial democracy concentrating on serving the needs of its own hard-working citizens?
2
Much of the Middle East is filled with people too stupid and hateful to even govern themselves. Unfortunately, due to the ascendancy of the Republican Party over the last 40 years, the same can now be said of the U.S.
2
“In Afghanistan, the United States has spent about $65 billion to build the army and police forces. Even before last week’s setback in Kunduz, many Afghan forces were struggling to defeat the Taliban, partly because of what many senior commanders said had been a precipitous American drawdown before Afghans were ready to be on their own.”
Obviously money and modern equipage are not the solution. Neither is part time train up, or for that matter the presence of military professionals as advisors. The notion that essentially ad hoc military proxies are going to perform in the same way as a long standing, institutionalize, and multidimensional and multi capable professional military or civil police force is decidedly wrong headed from the get go.
At the same time one has to wonder how groups like the Taliban and ISIS manage to conduct sustained successful military operations, while western trained and equipped opposing forces fail? This is happening despite significant disadvantages in the face of highly capable overhead surveillance and sustained combat air support provided by U.S. forces.
However abstract it may seem, commitment to core objectives and cohesion of purpose are likely key factors.
Despite the obvious political liabilities, it is absolutely time for genuine America soul searching over the chronic failures of our military interventions during the last 14 years on nonstop warfare.
Obviously money and modern equipage are not the solution. Neither is part time train up, or for that matter the presence of military professionals as advisors. The notion that essentially ad hoc military proxies are going to perform in the same way as a long standing, institutionalize, and multidimensional and multi capable professional military or civil police force is decidedly wrong headed from the get go.
At the same time one has to wonder how groups like the Taliban and ISIS manage to conduct sustained successful military operations, while western trained and equipped opposing forces fail? This is happening despite significant disadvantages in the face of highly capable overhead surveillance and sustained combat air support provided by U.S. forces.
However abstract it may seem, commitment to core objectives and cohesion of purpose are likely key factors.
Despite the obvious political liabilities, it is absolutely time for genuine America soul searching over the chronic failures of our military interventions during the last 14 years on nonstop warfare.
1
Do you think obama might be relying for advice on his military advisers?
Good Morning: What was Michael Corleone's line from The Godfather, Part II? Perhaps "I think the rebels can win." Is this what our would-be Presidents really need--a course in Film History?
Just like an Iraqui or Afghan soldier, an American Machinist or engineer in the defense industry does not really care about the end result of his work.....he just wants a job
Supporting indigenous guerrilla groups fighting oppressive regimes is one thing. Creating rebal forces from scratch is quite another. The latter will forever have the flavor of mercenaries fighting on behalf of the United States, and no matter what the cause this will be the predominant impression.
This seems obvious, but apparently not to polcy makers eager to *do something" and accustomed to using military force ... emphasis on FORCE... to accomplish their ends.
Fact, sad as it may be: the US has morphed from the savior delivering Europe and Asia from imperial fascism into an imperialist power of its own. This is manifest in some of the many unsavory characters we backed during the Cold War, and this impression won't fade in the short term, especially as we continue to back strongmen who cater to our wishes, not the will of their people.
This seems obvious, but apparently not to polcy makers eager to *do something" and accustomed to using military force ... emphasis on FORCE... to accomplish their ends.
Fact, sad as it may be: the US has morphed from the savior delivering Europe and Asia from imperial fascism into an imperialist power of its own. This is manifest in some of the many unsavory characters we backed during the Cold War, and this impression won't fade in the short term, especially as we continue to back strongmen who cater to our wishes, not the will of their people.
2
It is very difficult for a power viewed by the population as an infidel invader to receive public support and goodwill.
That's really pretty obvious, wouldn't you say?
That's really pretty obvious, wouldn't you say?
3
If the American Recolution taught us nothing else, it demonstrated that smaller, untrained forces with a fire iin the belly win. We can lead our favorite troops to water, but we can't make them drink. Foreign trainers [us] and money don't beat passion on the battlefield. Our government is bleeding our coffers and killing our kids. The lessons keep coming. Learn!
4
Iran is the core problem in the Middle East. There are many unsavory players in the region, but the greatest threat to the U.S. Is Iran's unrelenting support of anti Isreal and U.S. groups. Now that we have the nuclear deal with Iran, we should move into a next phase of significantly ramped up challenge to Iran. If we do not, Iran's ramped up aggression to U.S. and allies expected with released funds from dropped sanctions will weaken U.S. dramatically.
1
Iran is not the core problem.
The core problem is that various groups, fueled by oil money and support from Russia, Europe and the US, have advanced weaponry and little desire to improve the lives of their fellow citizens.
The core problem is that various groups, fueled by oil money and support from Russia, Europe and the US, have advanced weaponry and little desire to improve the lives of their fellow citizens.
2
Old joke about French army surplus sale after WWII: "Rifles, never fired, dropped once". Our Arab allies (I use that word loosely) seem to be about as brave as the French in 1940.
2
France lost 210,000 men compared to 407,300 US casualties. The US fought longer and on two fronts and had the advantage of not having to fight an invading army, with accompanying civilian deaths and destruction of infrastructure.
I smell the stench of "Freedom Fries."
I am not now nor ever have been a member Of Congress.
Another in a long line of skinning the Americans. Obama, Bush, Reagan, Clinton, Carter, AND Nixon in China. Just give it away, Just give it away. We're broke, but give, give, give.
They don't like us and you can't buy love. When will we learn?
They don't like us and you can't buy love. When will we learn?
4
The problem is that our foreign policy under President Obama, influenced by Zbigniew Brzezinski, has failed...Rightfully so, it's wrong minded and mean-spirited.
3
Sometimes you have to fire a gun in the air and say enough! Just reading the article makes you confused about who is fighting whom.get out of the Middle East now! No more trillions and blood for endless, hopeless wars. I served during the Vietnam mess and I still think of over 60,000 of our men who died for nothing. Let me repeat nothing! That we still have so called leaders who get us into these worthless wars makes me speechless. The only thing that will stop this government from endless wars is the draft. The streets will be filled with anti-war protestors and no official running for office will ever be elected.
That is the main reason the draft doesn't exist. The generals no they would never be able to fight these endless wars without support of the American people. If the American people had 'skin in the game' the game would end.
"No way my son or daughter is going over to die"
That is the main reason the draft doesn't exist. The generals no they would never be able to fight these endless wars without support of the American people. If the American people had 'skin in the game' the game would end.
"No way my son or daughter is going over to die"
4
I'm not sure what the answer is. I don't believe anyone has the answer. However, if we "just get out" because we can't understand who we're fighting or why or what they want, then we may have more terrorism or immigrants here. Between sticking our head in the sand and rushing in like one-answer men, we have to continue to muck through and help civilians where we can.The answer may not be military, but carrot and stick economic, plus critical military support for leaders who consistently protect civilians in their areas or countries.
1
We are trying to convince ourselves that everybody is ready for (and wants) democracy. This is not true in Africa and is not true in the Muslim countries. The fact that our President is partial to Muslims and our politicians operate on ideology adds to this.
The money would be better spent in this country.
The money would be better spent in this country.
2
It is Vietnam all over. Lessons were never learned. You can take the horse to the water but you cannot make it drink the water. America can train security forces pump in the dollars but if they do not have the will and courage to fight when the time comes to do what they were trained for then they will fail to sustain foreign forces. Part of this is taking the wrong side and loosing the goodwill of the local people. A perfect example is the bombing of the hospital run by Doctors without borders which has been condemned by the UN. Guess how many Afghans are going consider the USA as a force fighting for improving their lives. They probably already had just a few hospitals and a scarcity of doctors and now the misery is compounded. Going back to the Vietnam war, the bombing campaigns did not win the hearts of the South Vietnamese nor did it make them more resolute to fight the Vietcong. Second point, stop this business of regime change and blatant interference unless cordially invited to resolve issues militarily like Kuwait's invitation to evict Iraqi occupation in the latter part of the last century. Third point, don't expect the military to solve political and diplomatic problems and Finally, capitalize on military victories by forcing diplomatic solutions. Afghanistan war was won by the USA by the beginning of this decade and a political solution should have been reached with the Taliban giving up their arms and being a part of the government in a limited restricted way.
3
There are always at least two paradigm working for us at the same time, one is being orchestrated by the (CIA)and the other by our vocal and the public persona. The statement by a General that we have 5 or 6 US trained fighters left in Syria and the other when the Russians bombed the anti-State forces in Syria the State Department is complaining that they are killing the US trained and equipped forces fighting Assad’s regime. Essentially what I am trying to point out is the fact that we do not know who is telling the truth. It is not the first time and is not limited to this government and is neither limited to Syria, it is happening in Yemen and many other countries where we are actively fighting the so called war on terror.
This article points out certain realities, the foremost is the dictation in our foreign policy by the Military Industrial Complex which now includes substantial manpower in the form of independent contractors deployed by the US Government to train and equip foreign fighting forces – none of the countries that we have these contractors in have been invaded by any foreign country but we have chosen to take sides in domestic problems. Our presence where there are no winners and only losers exacerbate the situation.
We have very smart people in the government and I just wonder if it is all by design and part of a great game and people are being used as pawns in this deadly game.
Enough of the killing, our lives matter, every human life matters.
This article points out certain realities, the foremost is the dictation in our foreign policy by the Military Industrial Complex which now includes substantial manpower in the form of independent contractors deployed by the US Government to train and equip foreign fighting forces – none of the countries that we have these contractors in have been invaded by any foreign country but we have chosen to take sides in domestic problems. Our presence where there are no winners and only losers exacerbate the situation.
We have very smart people in the government and I just wonder if it is all by design and part of a great game and people are being used as pawns in this deadly game.
Enough of the killing, our lives matter, every human life matters.
3
We could instead spend all those billions on our war on drugs which is not working either. Think TRILLIONS wasted, just one one program.
1
It is not for us to win the "hearts and minds" of the people in these foreign lands. It is up to their leaders. If the leadership of their governments is not in sync with the aspirations of the people no amount of training by us or anyone else will permanently change the outcome. Too often we are caught up in trying to maintain the vestiges of a colonial era or political boundaries that do not coincide with the ethnic and religious realities on the ground. We should not and cannot change the world to conform to our image; particularly, at a time when our dysfunctional congress is held hostage by extremists who portray a rather ugly image to the rest of the world. We need to get our own house in order and let the rest of the world attend to their affairs.
The US govt should really understand by now, you cannot change a society's culture. Middle Eastern people think, believe and respond differently to every aspect of life then Americans.
The US will never change a culture that treats women like property. Period. The end.
The US will continue to waste billions of US tax dollars and US lives by sending troops to regions that WILL NEVER adopt to our way of anything, including fighting.
Stop the insanity. Let ISIS rule, eventually other Middle Eastern countries will take action.
The US pulled that Genie from the bottle by invading Iraq in 2003. We can't stop the madness in a foreign culture that disrespects western values.
The US will never change a culture that treats women like property. Period. The end.
The US will continue to waste billions of US tax dollars and US lives by sending troops to regions that WILL NEVER adopt to our way of anything, including fighting.
Stop the insanity. Let ISIS rule, eventually other Middle Eastern countries will take action.
The US pulled that Genie from the bottle by invading Iraq in 2003. We can't stop the madness in a foreign culture that disrespects western values.
2
Terrible, heartbreaking and it makes one feel hopeless. Seems to me most of the comments are saying we should be out of those countries, the money should be spent here in our own country, helping the poor, fixing up our infrastructure, etc. I agree! Meanwhile, our government lies stagnant, unwilling to go near gun control, watching our bridges and highways turn to dust, worrying more about de-funding Planned Parenthood. Honestly, what can one person do. Vote? Sure. But still nothing changes. I honestly think corruption is so deeply rooted in our system that there is no way out of this quagmire except violent revolution against the oligarchs.
After Bay of Pigs showed Castro to be unbeatable and President Kennedy said that Cubans would be welcomed in the US, everyone opted to emigrate instead of fighting for the country. The few that did otherwise paid dearly.
Same has happened with Merkel's invitation into Europe: Though choice isn't it? live in Berlin on a government check without working or fighting to the death in the desert.
Also, I think our army is not training well or sufficiently their officer corps. They may have a problem also with political patronage determining the senior appointments notably in Iraq and Afghanistan. I don't hear of their troops killing their officers and then running. it is more like the officers run and abandon their soldiers to their fate.
We should train their officers and then their officers train their conscripts. And we should use their ethnic lines. Stop the nonsense of amalgamating units; it is not like mixing recruits from Georgia and Michigan.
Same has happened with Merkel's invitation into Europe: Though choice isn't it? live in Berlin on a government check without working or fighting to the death in the desert.
Also, I think our army is not training well or sufficiently their officer corps. They may have a problem also with political patronage determining the senior appointments notably in Iraq and Afghanistan. I don't hear of their troops killing their officers and then running. it is more like the officers run and abandon their soldiers to their fate.
We should train their officers and then their officers train their conscripts. And we should use their ethnic lines. Stop the nonsense of amalgamating units; it is not like mixing recruits from Georgia and Michigan.
1
Worst of all, not a lot of corporate profit in military training. Equipment, vehicles, ordinance... now we're talking to the stockholders
I remember listening to Eikenberry laying out this scenario at the hearings where Obama was persuaded by the hawks to "surge" instead of withdraw. His arguments were convincing at that time and have been proven to be accurate.
1
It's never too late to get out and don't look back. We never learn. Cut and run, yup, the faster the better. Our country needs a tune up. We have old falling down infrastructure, we must get ready for what's going to occur from global warming. We have to upgrade and build new schools. Our own country is in dire straights. Trillions in taxes for useless war's in places where people hate us must end now.
3
Starting with Vietnam, we have shone an uncanny ability to pick the less motivated side, again and again. We err over and over and never learn. What is our blind spot? Something to do with our particular brand of capitalism and the perspective it fosters? We are way over here, yet we venture forth across the seas like fools. We don't like to think things through and seem weak. Instead we are dumb. And we send our troops on ill-advised missions. They do their job well. But they have to come home eventually -- and the side we picked turns out a loser. Such a pattern.
1
We are committing national suicide. Incompetence and evil is exposed in the bombing of Doctors without Borders hospital in Afghanistan. There is no doubt that the Taliban will prevail in the long run.
3
You cannot count on foreign fighters to do the job American military personnel are trained to do. No amount of money will motivate mercenaries (and that's what they are, even in their home countries) unless they have the internal fortitude to fight for their own freedom. Most Muslim fighters combating ISIS or Al Qaesa are only half-hearted in their efforts; they simply do not have the will to kill fellow Muslims, even though their own lives will be subjugated to the whims of mullahs and religious fanatics when they are conquered.
1
President Obama is probably thinking it is better to expend money rather than sending forces back into a region that does not really share our ideas of democracy, mom, and apple pie. The problem, as others have pointed out, our objectives are significantly different from those are affected by this fighting. As others have also said, the endgame in the region will be determined not by the US, Russia, or other Western Powers, but the region itself. Peace, as fragile as peace can be, will come when Iran, Saudi Arabia, and others say it is time for peace.
25
Back in 1964 when LBJ used the Gulf of Tonkin incident to justify our massive failed intervention in Vietnam (no evidence exists that the incident ever occurred), at least our leaders still had a plan. Of course, it was a terrible plan, based on the "logic" of the "domino effect." But at least they *tried* to have a plan.
Since 1981 no U.S. leader has really had a plan. Oh sure, Reagan had a plan, but it only worked because of the Soviet Union's decision to invade Afghanistan, which led to the fall of the Soviet Union. And Reagan plan to create more budget deficits in eight years than the U.S. presidents had created from 1789 to 1981 wasn't exactly a winner.
But since 1989 plans are developed primarily to entertain the masses back home and win their support with promises of:
"Shock and awe"
"Mission Accomplished"
"The Surge"
as if foreign policy was made for a reality TV/pro sports audience. Of course, today most Americans belong to Generation Reality TV/Pro Sports, so this type of planning makes sense...to maintain power.
Since 1981 no U.S. leader has really had a plan. Oh sure, Reagan had a plan, but it only worked because of the Soviet Union's decision to invade Afghanistan, which led to the fall of the Soviet Union. And Reagan plan to create more budget deficits in eight years than the U.S. presidents had created from 1789 to 1981 wasn't exactly a winner.
But since 1989 plans are developed primarily to entertain the masses back home and win their support with promises of:
"Shock and awe"
"Mission Accomplished"
"The Surge"
as if foreign policy was made for a reality TV/pro sports audience. Of course, today most Americans belong to Generation Reality TV/Pro Sports, so this type of planning makes sense...to maintain power.
Don't forget that we provided weapons to the mujahideen fighting the Soviet Union in Afghanistan against the Russians. And those weapons were then used against us.
After 60 years, South Korea is still unable to defend itself without a U.S.A. army garrisoned on its territory, and billions of U.S.A. tax payer dollars thrown yearly at its "defense." Why expect a different outcome anywhere else?
3
There is a tremendous amount of foreign policy naivete in the Obama Administration, and giving expensive equipment to sketchy characters who say the right things is all the proof we need. And Obama is making things worse by saying Assad has to go. Why, because Israel doesn't like him? Sorry, not a good reason. If we were smart we'd align with Putin to destroy ISIS, while keeping Assad in power. Imagine that, a joint US-Russian military operation...
6
" Imagine that, a joint US-Russian military operation..."
At one time there was talk of a Grand Alliance of the US, Russia and India to fight radical Islam, but our Dear Leader Obama seems to have destroyed any chance of that.
At one time there was talk of a Grand Alliance of the US, Russia and India to fight radical Islam, but our Dear Leader Obama seems to have destroyed any chance of that.
1
And another unspoken little fact: Assad has always been a solid supporter of the independence of the 2.5 million Christian minority in Syria. Those minorities are terrorized and abused by "our friends" but kept safe when in areas under Assad control.
1
See, this is the problems with the neo-con view of the world.
They want America involved everywhere but it turns out that this requires heavy American presence which in turn results in cost of treasure and blood.
They want America involved everywhere but it turns out that this requires heavy American presence which in turn results in cost of treasure and blood.
1
We have taught the skills and handed over the hardware. What we cannot teach is fire in the belly, and this has been a problem since Vietnam.
2
Anyone reading this article would know immediately that having our soldiers train troops in the Middle East is not working. So what kind of lies are being peddled at White House briefings every morning and why does the President believe them? It is inconceivable that the administration continues to justify this practice when it is so clearly a miserable failure. We should bring our soldiers home, now. Why doesn't anyone in Washington see this? All the time and money foolishly spent on Benghazi, and not one high-profile investigation into the madness we're engaged in in the ME.
67
And what do you propose we do once the Taliban and ISIS start using their base of operation to plot terrorist attacks again to the US?
Follow the money. Wars are very, very profitable. Besides Big Oil there's the armaments industry. We are a major arms supplier, there are few planes, guns and missiles that aren't for sale. Every military function we privatized is very, very profitable. So there are many very profitable enterprises making huge political donations. Politicians respond to big donors, and they fear having their big donors transfer to a different politician. It deeply affects their way of thinking.
Our government is corrupt.
Our government is corrupt.
I was part of the fiasco in Vietnam in 1968 and saw our corrupt puppet regime in the South and their military first hand. In fact we had numerous firefights with the South Vietnames army because of who knows what reason other than incompetency. We lost 60,000 of my fellow Americans to that immoral war and killed around 2 million Vietnamese that really meant us no harm until we started going over their with the French and messing with them. All the armchair generals and neo-cons and hawks in Washington and the Pentagon are dangerous to my health and state of mind and to everyone else in the world who has valued natural resources that our multi-national corporations want. Its no different than the Lakotas in the Black Hills and the gold in these sacred mountains that the Hurst dynasty sent General Custerin to kill for. Same as it ever was.
1
Some of these comments rightly point out the difficulty of persuading local populations in warring states to favor our form of government and way of living. But there's more to it than that. Even in Vietnam (and Cambodia) there was a horrendous bloodbath after we left, and it wasn't limited to those who had supported our military presence in Vietnam. The point of training local fighters in Syria was to do something about the slaughter in that country, attributable to the Assad regime. I don't think Mr. Obama's objective was to convert Syria to a Western-style democracy. For this reason I think many comments here are wide of the mark.
Lot's of comments about the problem but no solutions. Of course it is always easy to criticize from outside. Maybe isolationism is the solution but then you have a refugee problem.
What does this tell Washington about how badly the countries they're pouring my tax dollars into want "democracy"?
What is wrong with this picture?
What is wrong with this picture?
1
The Taliban was the government in Afghanistan when we invaded. The Taliban will be the government in Afghanistan once we get out. In the meantime, American taxpayers will have rewarded military contractors zillions of dollars. True, those contractors provide jobs, but are those the jobs we want to be doing? Did our forefathers intend that we should become the world's arms dealer?
1
The region is self dividing along sectarian lines. That's what the people want. They will not sacrifice to support these artificial Western borders.
The Sunni world is falling apart. The Shia world is fairly stable. We have hitched our wagon to the Sunni gulf states which are major financiers of terror and the instability it creates. Then we try to get the locals to fight the terrorists. It's madness.
We unendingly support tyrants and oppressive regimes for their oil. Everyone knows it. We install weak and ineffective puppets to rule which are quickly bound up in corruption. Everyone know that too. Then we try to get the locals to fight for these weak and corrupt proxy leaders. No way. They will not.
We have done nothing right. It's time to reconsider alternative policy. But we wont because that will make us look like the fools that we have been.
The Sunni world is falling apart. The Shia world is fairly stable. We have hitched our wagon to the Sunni gulf states which are major financiers of terror and the instability it creates. Then we try to get the locals to fight the terrorists. It's madness.
We unendingly support tyrants and oppressive regimes for their oil. Everyone knows it. We install weak and ineffective puppets to rule which are quickly bound up in corruption. Everyone know that too. Then we try to get the locals to fight for these weak and corrupt proxy leaders. No way. They will not.
We have done nothing right. It's time to reconsider alternative policy. But we wont because that will make us look like the fools that we have been.
3
Paying a poor peasant to fight for a government we created, what could possibly go wrong?
4
What commenters -- and, apparently, the NY Times -- fail to understand is this is not about bringing democracy or helping to create freedom. This is about multi-billion dollar Defense contracts lining the pockets of very rich political donors.
So if you really want to know why our efforts at bringing democracy and peace fail time and time again, it's because we're not focused on bringing democracy and peace. Those calling the shots are focused on rewarding campaign cash (and keeping that spigot open) and making as big a profit as possible.
So if you really want to know why our efforts at bringing democracy and peace fail time and time again, it's because we're not focused on bringing democracy and peace. Those calling the shots are focused on rewarding campaign cash (and keeping that spigot open) and making as big a profit as possible.
23
Our billions go to fill the ranks of foreign armies with young men whose only economic opportunity is to join the army, to Take orders from officers focused on preserving their own piece of the American money pie, nominally led by civilian leaders entrenched in impossibly complex sectarian politics. Our money creates the problem in the first place so of course it can't solve it!
2
Vietnam meant that Americans won't put up with being drafted to go fight for Empire thousands of miles away from the homeland. And Iraq (along with Vietnam) means that mercenary armies don't fight effectively on behalf of Empire. Maybe it's time to give up on Empire.
It's been an expensive and bloody run since World War II. Millions have died attempting to maintain American and Western hegemony. Perhaps it's time to rethink the lessons the Atlantic alliance took from the two world wars and the depression.
The current regime doesn't seem to be working.
It's been an expensive and bloody run since World War II. Millions have died attempting to maintain American and Western hegemony. Perhaps it's time to rethink the lessons the Atlantic alliance took from the two world wars and the depression.
The current regime doesn't seem to be working.
4
Our empire image is a facade, a delusion. We lost Vietnam , Iraq, ran from Yemen and Libya. Our impotence stands exposed in Syria. How truly pathetic!
1
Read the comments: the people have spooked...... nation building, democracy building using might just doesn't work. Lets show democracy works here at home. Lets fix us(a).
3
The only sane thing we can do is to get out and stay out! All of our mercenary troops, guns, drones, missiles and bribery have shown to be nothing more than vehicles for military and corporate profiteering and pandering to the stupid and naive chicken hawks in US society.
Stop trying to wrap everything in the American flag. Take the profit and glory out of violence if you want to improve the lives of these people. Yankee come home!
Stop trying to wrap everything in the American flag. Take the profit and glory out of violence if you want to improve the lives of these people. Yankee come home!
3
As far as the US is concerned the only interest in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan is as potential exporters of terrorism and that coincides with the interests of Russia. It is different for the EU which in addition to terrorism is faced with a huge migration problem. It is pointless for the US to keep investing huge sums in military solutions. Heartless as it is to those suffering under terrible regimes the only practical alternative at this time is to isolate them and quarantine them. Unlike the Taliban, ISIS is not a domestic product, it is sustained by foreign fighters and foreign money and will eventually collapse if its sources dry up. What is needed are safety zones for those escaping the grip of ISIS, a closing of borders and a commitment from Arab countries to stop all funding. Money wasted on training fighters that don't fight would be put to better use to feed and protect the safety zones so refugees can out wait ISIS rather than keep moving to Europe.
Obama would make a great philosopher king, but his vision of a world in which the US plays a secondary advisory role has backfired with miserable results. He somehow believed that, if the US only ceded its leadership role, then there would be a convocation of equals among the nations of the world which would be able to reach a rational consensus on how to solve the world's problems. We already have the UN for that, but the old axiom that, when there is a vacuum in power someone will step in, remains true. So Putin has seized the initiative in the Middle East while Obama relies on a do-nothing coalition of 60 nations as an answer to the threat of ISIS. Domestically he is always supported by the media and can always blame his failures on Republican obstructionism, but foreign policy is something that the President owns and must take responsibility for. He had his way and he failed. Unfortunately there's no way to put a spin on it.
3
Post invasion of Iraq during the early days of the Bremer's initial days in Baghdad, there were 400,000 trained, coordinated, organized and equipped. Yet the Bush people decided to totally disband the entire Iraqi military infrastructure. Iraqi generals who sat in Bremer's office were dismayed when told these 400,000 soldiers would be sent to the street. These are the same who withstood a relentless 8 year war with Iran and who ten years earlier had fought against the Americans in Operation Desert Storm(1991).
Added to this chaos did Bremer and the Bush peopled fired the entire Iraqi in fracture resulting in the total breakdown of civil support facilities (electricity, water, etc.).
How is it that billions spent in Iraq for training and as Mosul only about 500 ISIS fighters displaced the entire Iraq Army in a city of over 1 million people. ISIS secured over 2400 US military vehicles given to the Iraqi Army.
Bottom line: The Bush people made decisions that shaped the downfall of Iraq and perhaps the Middle East for years to come.
The same thing will happen in Afghanistan. The hundred of billions spent and borrowed abroad will all be nothing. The 2370 KIA in Afghanistan..the 4460 KIA in Iraq and the thousands of wounded are the direct result on absolutely failed decisions of the previous administration.
Perhaps one of the news organizations should ask Bush "what he would do in Syria"...that is to say, if he knows where Syria is...
Added to this chaos did Bremer and the Bush peopled fired the entire Iraqi in fracture resulting in the total breakdown of civil support facilities (electricity, water, etc.).
How is it that billions spent in Iraq for training and as Mosul only about 500 ISIS fighters displaced the entire Iraq Army in a city of over 1 million people. ISIS secured over 2400 US military vehicles given to the Iraqi Army.
Bottom line: The Bush people made decisions that shaped the downfall of Iraq and perhaps the Middle East for years to come.
The same thing will happen in Afghanistan. The hundred of billions spent and borrowed abroad will all be nothing. The 2370 KIA in Afghanistan..the 4460 KIA in Iraq and the thousands of wounded are the direct result on absolutely failed decisions of the previous administration.
Perhaps one of the news organizations should ask Bush "what he would do in Syria"...that is to say, if he knows where Syria is...
3
FYI Bush has not been president since 2008 and the Middle East is much worse than when he left office in case you haven't noticed.
1
If local mercenaries fail to do the job, just fly over some gang bangers and offer them a commuted sentence for a fraction of the cost.
3
"...calling into question the effectiveness of the tens of billions of dollars spent by the United States..."
No kidding. This is like one of those statements like, "Government Study Concludes That Water Runs Downhill." We've been wasting money in the Middle East because it enriches the defense industry, and for no other reason.
No kidding. This is like one of those statements like, "Government Study Concludes That Water Runs Downhill." We've been wasting money in the Middle East because it enriches the defense industry, and for no other reason.
8
As Harry Reed said to the Republican counter part that Stop Bang Their Head again the wall,I wonder why is no one say same thing to those losers at the White House and The Pentagon.....The most funny thing is those guys who can't do their job are turning around and train the other people who to.
I have posted many comments in this space in opposition to President Obama's views, particularly in regard to Israel, but I have never doubted for a moment that he is a patriot.
He is currently awash in a sea of troubles relating to Russia, Iran, Syria, ISIS, Iraq, Afghanistan, refugees, guns, crime and race, few of which have simple answers, if any answers at all. To make matters worse, Republicans oppose him at every turn and will continue to do so until his term expires.
What he ought to do now -- for the good of the country and in the interest of his own reputation in history -- is resign in favor of Vice-President Biden. No one would fault him for doing this. His resignation would be widely
understood as a courageous and unselfish act.
Vice President Biden is well liked and widely respected across Democratic and Republican party lines. He would preside over the remainder of President Obama's term with the best wishes of the millions of Americans
who want to see an end put quickly to the crippling political divisions now doing grave harm to this country.
The President has already served for 6 and 1/2 years. There are only 473 days left until his term-of-office expires. He has more-than-honorably fulfilled his contract with the American people. There would be no shame in leaving now. Marathon races end with one runner passing a baton to another. President Obama is a patriot.
He is currently awash in a sea of troubles relating to Russia, Iran, Syria, ISIS, Iraq, Afghanistan, refugees, guns, crime and race, few of which have simple answers, if any answers at all. To make matters worse, Republicans oppose him at every turn and will continue to do so until his term expires.
What he ought to do now -- for the good of the country and in the interest of his own reputation in history -- is resign in favor of Vice-President Biden. No one would fault him for doing this. His resignation would be widely
understood as a courageous and unselfish act.
Vice President Biden is well liked and widely respected across Democratic and Republican party lines. He would preside over the remainder of President Obama's term with the best wishes of the millions of Americans
who want to see an end put quickly to the crippling political divisions now doing grave harm to this country.
The President has already served for 6 and 1/2 years. There are only 473 days left until his term-of-office expires. He has more-than-honorably fulfilled his contract with the American people. There would be no shame in leaving now. Marathon races end with one runner passing a baton to another. President Obama is a patriot.
3
He has already ceded his role on the international stage. There's no need for him to formalize it as you suggest. Domestically he still has some life in him, so your suggestion is basically absurd. It has never happened in the history of the world. But perhaps you jest.
I gather that you believe Biden will send six or eight hundred thousand troops to Iraq and another similar force to Afghanistan and that these forces would secure the current governments (set up by us)? That would be Biden's Option A. Option B is to continue our current efforts, which is clearly doomed. Option C is to completely disengage until an actual threat to US security is demonstrated. Which one of these options would "Mr. Sunshine" President Biden select?
Resigning from office would not be seen as anything other than failure.
The open hatred, contempt, and willful determination to fight him at every step with which Obama has been treated by many of his fellow Americans, since day one, are not some political reality from which he must resign after merely giving it a good fight. They are growing pains, like this nation has always endured as we continue our progress from what we are to what we must become in order to realize the full vision of our Founders as described in our Constitution.
The open hatred, contempt, and willful determination to fight him at every step with which Obama has been treated by many of his fellow Americans, since day one, are not some political reality from which he must resign after merely giving it a good fight. They are growing pains, like this nation has always endured as we continue our progress from what we are to what we must become in order to realize the full vision of our Founders as described in our Constitution.
1
Training won't motivate people to fight when they don't believe in the cause. It didn't work in Vietnam and it won't work in Iraq or Afghanistan. For the afghans trainees, it's just a job. When the American leave, their resolve evaporates. We can't instill progressive ideals in cultures that are unfamiliar with them and don't really care.
3
Al of our middle east endeavors have failed. We are in a quagmire - a tar pit.
We seem to have never understand the religious and/or tribal loyalties that drive people who do what they do. We have tried to impose a Western style of democracy onto countries where it will not work. Worst of all, we never learn from these mistakes. There are factors contributing to this mess that we can not fix/undo/control
The British carving up of Iraq
The Kurds desiring their own country
Iran's desire to fight with the Sunnis
Saudi Arabia's desire to counter whatever Iran does
However, our listening to Big Oil to stay in this Region?
That is another matter - and one we can change.
We seem to have never understand the religious and/or tribal loyalties that drive people who do what they do. We have tried to impose a Western style of democracy onto countries where it will not work. Worst of all, we never learn from these mistakes. There are factors contributing to this mess that we can not fix/undo/control
The British carving up of Iraq
The Kurds desiring their own country
Iran's desire to fight with the Sunnis
Saudi Arabia's desire to counter whatever Iran does
However, our listening to Big Oil to stay in this Region?
That is another matter - and one we can change.
The point, which a series of American leaders have failed to grasp is that they ain't like us. The melting pot that is, or at least was, America did much to blunt the divisive effects of tribalism, religious fundamentalism and ingrained cultural practices. Democracy will not emerge after military intervention to overthrow foreign dictators until the local population is ready to embrace that outcome. This is currently not the case in Afghanistan, Iraq or Syria just as it was not the case when the U.S. tried to build up the army of South Vietnam. Spending billions on these ventures avoids large scale loss of American lives but will be no more effective than "shock and awe".
The Pentagon budget is $600B a year. That's $600B a year. And the warhawks in Congress want to increase that. Remember, this doesn't include the cost of the Homeland Security, the NSA, CIA, etc. The cost also has not included the money spent on our "wars" (in quotes since the Congress never declared war on anyone). So, it seems reasonable to assume, and we have to assume since many of the budgets are secret, that we are spending $1T, that's a T for trillion, a year for our military and security organizations. Think what just a part of that money could do for this country? Consider, if you don't want to use it for government purposes, what part of that money could mean in less taxes. Like all empires we are now in our decline mode and trying spend our way out of it. Look at history. It won't work.
2
We spent a couple of trillion dollars on the ill-fated Afghan and Iraq wars. Why do we keep throwing good money after bad. We need to be spending this at home.
3
Here's the problem.
The countries in question do not have a Second Amendment, which creates a culture of self-protection.
When "soldiers" are drawn from a different culture, it is unlikely that they will be effective.
As well, since they do not play the national anthem before their sports events as they do in the USA, they do not develop a pride of country that will sustain them in the battlefield,
In point of fact, when looking at the broad picture, the "culture" that exists in these places will rarely sustain committed soldiers. Typically, those who are "committed" are paid mercenaries or crazed plunderers or just plain thugs.
In a politically correct world all "cultures" are equal and are deserving of respect. In a real world, many "cultures" (judging by their success in taking care of their people) are not worthy of that respect.
The countries in question do not have a Second Amendment, which creates a culture of self-protection.
When "soldiers" are drawn from a different culture, it is unlikely that they will be effective.
As well, since they do not play the national anthem before their sports events as they do in the USA, they do not develop a pride of country that will sustain them in the battlefield,
In point of fact, when looking at the broad picture, the "culture" that exists in these places will rarely sustain committed soldiers. Typically, those who are "committed" are paid mercenaries or crazed plunderers or just plain thugs.
In a politically correct world all "cultures" are equal and are deserving of respect. In a real world, many "cultures" (judging by their success in taking care of their people) are not worthy of that respect.
3
The waste and foolishness described here is jaw-dropping. Our leaders, from Bush and Cheney to Obama and Clinton, on both sides of the aisles of Congress, have all been corrupted by the military-industrial complex and Saudi Arabia. Big Oil has them by the short hairs. We need a leader who tells us the truth; who isn't owned by those interests. This is another reason why the Sanders revolution is happening.
1
This article misrepresents the "Obama Doctrine" for the purpose of arm chair criticism. Many of the regions cited in the piece once had U.S. boots on the ground (regular military and contractors). These forces had only modest success at quelling the complex tensions. Moreover, the presence of U.S. forces was deeply unpopular both at home and abroad. At some point, the U.S. forces had to leave and the local people had to take responsibility for their affairs.
The Administration opted to provide support to local forces wiht the potential to keep the regions stable. In some cases it worked as in the Kurdish zones of Iraq and Syria, and the core areas of Afghanistan. In other regions, where the local forces were fractured or lacking in population, the strategy has not worked well.
It is a trial and error process with benefits and drawbacks. It is certainly preferred over sacrificing American lives -- except perhaps to perpetual war-mongers like Senators McCain and Graham -- only to face the prospect (once again) of having to leave at some point.
The Administration opted to provide support to local forces wiht the potential to keep the regions stable. In some cases it worked as in the Kurdish zones of Iraq and Syria, and the core areas of Afghanistan. In other regions, where the local forces were fractured or lacking in population, the strategy has not worked well.
It is a trial and error process with benefits and drawbacks. It is certainly preferred over sacrificing American lives -- except perhaps to perpetual war-mongers like Senators McCain and Graham -- only to face the prospect (once again) of having to leave at some point.
1
We appear not to have learned the lesson of Vietnam.
There is no way to instill a desire to fight for one's country (which in many of these places is not even a recognized concept) if the individual lacks that will.
We could not do that in South Vietnam. Why is that lesson so hard to grasp?
Most of the places where we are trying to "stand up a country" never had a "country" before. Those people think in terms of relatives, possibly co-religionists, but not a nation having a central government and a specified territory on a map. Spending money and lives to acheive that end will continue to be a waste until the locals WANT the effort to succeed, and not simply to take rvenge on a hated historical opponent.
There is no way to instill a desire to fight for one's country (which in many of these places is not even a recognized concept) if the individual lacks that will.
We could not do that in South Vietnam. Why is that lesson so hard to grasp?
Most of the places where we are trying to "stand up a country" never had a "country" before. Those people think in terms of relatives, possibly co-religionists, but not a nation having a central government and a specified territory on a map. Spending money and lives to acheive that end will continue to be a waste until the locals WANT the effort to succeed, and not simply to take rvenge on a hated historical opponent.
We have to stop looking at every crisis in the world as somehow America's responsibility and especially a political demerit for whoever happens to be President.
How many times do we have to read or hear that the Syrian crisis is Obama's fault? If anything, Obama's steady hand keeping us OUT of this mess is probably his greatest foreign policy achievement.
How many times do we have to read or hear that the Syrian crisis is Obama's fault? If anything, Obama's steady hand keeping us OUT of this mess is probably his greatest foreign policy achievement.
One could reasonably ask why healthy young men are either refusing to fight to defend their countries or are fleeing those countries.
One factor which must be considered when looking at Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan is this --- none of these countries are nations in the sense we commonly understand the term.
Almost every American, when faced with a threat on his country, would instantly respond as an "American." Inhabitants of Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan would have much more divided loyalties.
Iraq and Syria are European creations, less than a century old. Afghanistan still lacks agreed borders and is --- and always has been --- a collection of insular, aggressive groups.
These countries are cauldrons of religious, ethnic, and tribal conflict. There is no American "melting pot" to be found there.
Why should young men in those countries fight to defend a "nation" which exists only in the mind of some foreign bureaucrats?
One factor which must be considered when looking at Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan is this --- none of these countries are nations in the sense we commonly understand the term.
Almost every American, when faced with a threat on his country, would instantly respond as an "American." Inhabitants of Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan would have much more divided loyalties.
Iraq and Syria are European creations, less than a century old. Afghanistan still lacks agreed borders and is --- and always has been --- a collection of insular, aggressive groups.
These countries are cauldrons of religious, ethnic, and tribal conflict. There is no American "melting pot" to be found there.
Why should young men in those countries fight to defend a "nation" which exists only in the mind of some foreign bureaucrats?
I can't recall who said it but the person quoted an old saying regarding small wars: "Great nations should stay out of the wars of small tribes." Our intentions are good but the outcome is always in doubt. The United States was correct to enter WWII (WWI is questionable). We were correct to enter the Korean War and defend South Korea. Also, in the beginning of the Vietnam War when the French were in over their heads and the United States refused to support their ally. We even refused the entreaties of Ho Chi Minh who early on sought assistance and alliance with the United States. But, some how we lost our way and became overcome with fear of communism and the "Domino Theory."
The first Afghan War was necessary. The Taliban attacked the United States. We were right to pursue and destroy them. But, again we lost our way and became deeper involved. The war was expanded to Iraq and that nation was literally dismantled into multiple tribal zones. We should not have been engaged in tribal wars that have been raging for centuries. Those people must solve their own problems. There can be exceptions as when Russia and Iran support Hezbollah and Hamas. The latter seek the utter destruction of Israel and would also destroy Egypt, Jordan and Turkey. Proxy wars supported by larger nations can too easily devolve into greater conflicts. But where only the tribes are waring we should refrain from military involvement. Let them sort it out.
The first Afghan War was necessary. The Taliban attacked the United States. We were right to pursue and destroy them. But, again we lost our way and became deeper involved. The war was expanded to Iraq and that nation was literally dismantled into multiple tribal zones. We should not have been engaged in tribal wars that have been raging for centuries. Those people must solve their own problems. There can be exceptions as when Russia and Iran support Hezbollah and Hamas. The latter seek the utter destruction of Israel and would also destroy Egypt, Jordan and Turkey. Proxy wars supported by larger nations can too easily devolve into greater conflicts. But where only the tribes are waring we should refrain from military involvement. Let them sort it out.
3
Our military is great at blowing things up. They are not good at country building. Is that really their mission?
2
Just to put this in context, this is Vietnamization all over again. As the Nixon administration found, unless you're willing to commit large numbers of American troops for indefinite periods, this is one of the only two remaining alternatives. The other alternative is empowering someone really ruthless to impose an authoritarian state, as we did in El Salvador.
ISIS/Taliban fighters join because they are motivated to fight.
The people we train may often join to get a salary, get a job, get a pension (which means not dying while on the job!).
That difference is essentially insurmountable.
Naturally groups like the ones we train can't make it without American troops babysitting and protecting them and being the ever-ready reliable backstop.
It's really the equivalent of units of SEALS against much larger groups of "soldiers" who much prefer to camp out, picnic and call home rather than fight.
The people we train may often join to get a salary, get a job, get a pension (which means not dying while on the job!).
That difference is essentially insurmountable.
Naturally groups like the ones we train can't make it without American troops babysitting and protecting them and being the ever-ready reliable backstop.
It's really the equivalent of units of SEALS against much larger groups of "soldiers" who much prefer to camp out, picnic and call home rather than fight.
2
Our country is owned and operated by war, oil and banking interests. Our owners do not care about anything but profits. Let Iran deal with this, let Saudi Arabia deal with this, let Russia deal with the mess we made. Why don't we get out and spend the money here? The answer is - we are owned and operated by people who make money from war. The GOAL is perpetual war. If peace were to break out they'd be broke. They do not care what the voters thing and persuade us by never-ending fear mongering on their own TV stations to embrace forever war. And we fall for it.. or at least don't question it. Go Bernie!
2
Billions from US to Sustain Foreign Forces--yet not a penny for Healthcare, funding education--Pre-K, forgiving college loans, afforable housing, protection of our own borders. The kicker--we are paying for this and giving it to people that would drop a nuclear bomb on our heads if they had the capability.
Wake up Washington and the Citizens of this country!
Wake up Washington and the Citizens of this country!
1
Kinda too bad that the trillions of dollars wasted on all these futile misadventures wasn't invested in building a 21st century infrastructure right here in this country.
These are brutal wars, but if we weren't there it wouldn't be our brutality, like bombing of Doctors without Borders hospitals.
These are brutal wars, but if we weren't there it wouldn't be our brutality, like bombing of Doctors without Borders hospitals.
1
The US has no moral authority to pick sides in foreign conflicts. It has caused more damage since WW II than any other country. It is also the most brutal from being the first and only to use nuclear weapons to the abhorrent criminal bombing of a hospital in Kunduz yesterday. This was clearly a deliberate act of terror as the US military was informed of the coordinates days before, as the bombing started and the bombing continued another hour with direct hits on several hospital buildings. It is not surprising that it is also the most violent internally with frequent mass killings such as the one in Oregon on Friday. There is a culture of violence from the White House to the street. The World must find a way to resist this violence.
If the US government wants foreigners to fight for it, it should make them all US citizens. Then maybe they'll fight for US goals rather than just sensibly try to keep themselves alive.
Americans have apparently forgotten one such situation in which an expeditionary force and residual training did work: South Korea. But we still have 30,000 troops stationed there, and I have little doubt the South Koreans would collapse without our boys fighting on the ground there.
Is this what we want? To maintain standing armies in foreign countries all over the globe? While our own country descends into disrepair and third world levels of poverty, homelessness, and domestic terrorism, I say no.
Is this what we want? To maintain standing armies in foreign countries all over the globe? While our own country descends into disrepair and third world levels of poverty, homelessness, and domestic terrorism, I say no.
1
Strangely enough, 14 years of indiscriminate bombing in Afghanistan, and 12 years of bombing and supporting a Shiite militia in sheep's clothing in Iraq, have failed to make us any friends.
Who could have guessed?
Who could have guessed?
4
Our leaders haven't learned that our "train and equip the locals" strategy never seems to work.
Our star-spangled generals haven't learned either.
But we, the American citizens who have been paying for all of these follies, should learn. And next time, we should just say no.
Our star-spangled generals haven't learned either.
But we, the American citizens who have been paying for all of these follies, should learn. And next time, we should just say no.
3
It is important to remember the Generals receive six figure pensions and lower level officers also received pensions ordinary Americans simply dream about. With this in mind, one best not counter grandiose fantasies of grandstanding politicians, besides these activities build lucrative careers.
In essence, most in the Middle East don't find our western culture that appealing and bombing and bribes(buy loyalty for a time) don't win many friends.
In essence, most in the Middle East don't find our western culture that appealing and bombing and bribes(buy loyalty for a time) don't win many friends.
The absence of the desired outcome should not really be a surprise. These types of training programs are carried out primarily for domestic political purposes, which is the context in which they should be judged.a
There are two primary reasons why training by USA forces is ineffective in the Middle East and Africa. First, the way the USA armed forces fight war relies on massive firepower, a global infrastructure, and technology, none of which are available to the groups we train. They can see how effective it is, but it will never be available them; it is a case of "do what I say" but not "do what I do". Second, the underlying assumption of the USA is that they are training the armed forces of a "nation-state", implying there is a national, political entity worth fighting for. This has never been the case in the situations we are involved in now, i.e., Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya.
There are two primary reasons why training by USA forces is ineffective in the Middle East and Africa. First, the way the USA armed forces fight war relies on massive firepower, a global infrastructure, and technology, none of which are available to the groups we train. They can see how effective it is, but it will never be available them; it is a case of "do what I say" but not "do what I do". Second, the underlying assumption of the USA is that they are training the armed forces of a "nation-state", implying there is a national, political entity worth fighting for. This has never been the case in the situations we are involved in now, i.e., Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya.
1
The US is pathetic at training foreign forces. Since Viet Nam we have tried to manufacture troops in our image and of course failure is the result.
The reason is partly political in that their cause is not our cause, and party cultural in that we are an arrogant people and insensitive to the cultural norms and traditions of the host society.
We don't know the languages, the history and the dynamics of the forces we are trying to change thus we end up being clumsy and unwelcome.
We also confuse our vast own lavish equipment and technology as evidence of our own military prowess but real military prowess is more in the mind than in all the junk we take to battle.
America adjusted for its asymmetry in military power and material has not put on a solid performance and delivered a desisive strategic success since 1945 and the Soviet did all the heavy lifting in that war.
T. E. Lawrence wrote about how cultural norms need to be respected by the guests and how the nature of Arab troops needs to be appreciated and built upon and not reworked into something different.
The reason is partly political in that their cause is not our cause, and party cultural in that we are an arrogant people and insensitive to the cultural norms and traditions of the host society.
We don't know the languages, the history and the dynamics of the forces we are trying to change thus we end up being clumsy and unwelcome.
We also confuse our vast own lavish equipment and technology as evidence of our own military prowess but real military prowess is more in the mind than in all the junk we take to battle.
America adjusted for its asymmetry in military power and material has not put on a solid performance and delivered a desisive strategic success since 1945 and the Soviet did all the heavy lifting in that war.
T. E. Lawrence wrote about how cultural norms need to be respected by the guests and how the nature of Arab troops needs to be appreciated and built upon and not reworked into something different.
This article in fact pints out the fundamental flaw in American "strategy" in Syria as one painful example. The U.S. is incapable of dislodging Assad short of an American ground invasion of Syria which will never happen and if it did would only lead to more dire consequences. So it is nothing short of insanity to refuse to negotiate with Assad n matter how terrible he is. There is no other alternative to ending the carnage and the mass suffering that just goes on and on while America fools itself that bombing missions are the answer.
Our one notable "success" in doing so has been the recent slaughter of doctors and the destruction of a hospital adding to the horrendous suffering.
Our one notable "success" in doing so has been the recent slaughter of doctors and the destruction of a hospital adding to the horrendous suffering.
With 1/6 of this country living in poverty, a crumbling infrastructure, a broken health care system, a failing education system and a "jobless" recovery the untold billions were used to prop up the military industrial complex instead. If anything, since the end of WWII, while many here think the US is the envy of world, the rest of the world holds contempt. 9/11 was an example of that contempt. Our response? Trying to take over other nations for their resources., under the guise of the "war on terror". Since 9/10/2014 3094 were killed by terrorist attacks, nearly 400,000 by gun related incidents and domestic terrorism we call mass shootings.
As fro the world, since 9/11, the US has made the world more dangerous; not less. The Middle East is the most unstable in decades, the US and Russia are fighting each other in Syria (indirectly), there is the largest movement of refugees since the end of WWII, and thousands are pouring into Syria to fight a world wide jihad. And yesterday, the US bombed a hospital to only elevate tensions., while Russia bomb forces against Assad.
The current Peace Prize winning president, and his predecessors, tout the greatness of democracy and the importance of protecting the "homeland".
I hope the wasted billions were worth it, in the misery it has caused both in the US and the rest of the world.
As fro the world, since 9/11, the US has made the world more dangerous; not less. The Middle East is the most unstable in decades, the US and Russia are fighting each other in Syria (indirectly), there is the largest movement of refugees since the end of WWII, and thousands are pouring into Syria to fight a world wide jihad. And yesterday, the US bombed a hospital to only elevate tensions., while Russia bomb forces against Assad.
The current Peace Prize winning president, and his predecessors, tout the greatness of democracy and the importance of protecting the "homeland".
I hope the wasted billions were worth it, in the misery it has caused both in the US and the rest of the world.
4
Ignoring or overlooking how things work in the ME, Saddam Hussein is taken out, mistake, Iraq's a mess. Mummar Gaddafi is taken out, mistake, Libya's a mess. Okay, let's try the same thing in Syria and expect something different, wrong again. Afghanistan, big mess. Hey, it's only blood and treasure, your blood, your treasure. Will anyone be held accountable?
1
I'm truly dumbfounded by what I just read. First off battling an insurgency is a lose lose battle in today's world. Unless the west is fully committed to occupying a country, disarming the population, writing its constitution, run a provisional government and pour trillions of economic and infrastructure investments, any measure will fail.
I would posit that Obama's strategy is exactly what Americans want. We don't want our soldiers dying for "friends" who shoot us in the back, we don't want our tax dollars going to profiteering contractors building roads and bridges only to have them blown up by road side bombs. We all know from Vienam that bombing campaigns won't defeat insurgents, but are we willing to call for a draft to augment our dwindling all volunteer army, to fight wars that don't benefit this country?
Thw writers seem rather cavalier about war, killing and committing our resources. I wonder what they would be writing if American soldiers were coming home in body bags on a weekly basis from three fronts. I wonder what theses writers would writing if this was an army of drafted young boys and girls. I wonder what these writers would be writing if instead of billions, the price tag was trillions?
I would posit that Obama's strategy is exactly what Americans want. We don't want our soldiers dying for "friends" who shoot us in the back, we don't want our tax dollars going to profiteering contractors building roads and bridges only to have them blown up by road side bombs. We all know from Vienam that bombing campaigns won't defeat insurgents, but are we willing to call for a draft to augment our dwindling all volunteer army, to fight wars that don't benefit this country?
Thw writers seem rather cavalier about war, killing and committing our resources. I wonder what they would be writing if American soldiers were coming home in body bags on a weekly basis from three fronts. I wonder what theses writers would writing if this was an army of drafted young boys and girls. I wonder what these writers would be writing if instead of billions, the price tag was trillions?
3
Read Sun Tzu "Art of War" much?
During British Raj in India, Britain had only 30,000 British troops and Indian Army of 300,000. The arrangement worked as long as the Indian Army considered them as subordinate to British officers. The moment, after the INA invasion of India, the Indian Army understood its root, British had to leave India. The stretagy of trained foreign army doing the job of a foreign master is a false strategy - National Army depends of National pride and a sense of sacrifice for nationhood. This can not be created by money or by boot camps - it require the National leaders and call for them to sacrifice life for nationhood. The struggle we are observing in Iraq and Afganisthan is the reflection of this false strategy. Let us focus on creating National leaders and allow them to build the National Army. Democracy as a tool of foreign policy is pipe dream - democracy is the evolution of a society, it can not be imposed by a foreign power.
3
Let's stop being the police for the rest of the world. All this action in foreign countries does is make everyone hate us. However if we get out of countries the whole military/industrial complex that we have created since WWII will collapse causing a dip in our economy. Time to save lives and let these crazy countries regroup after we have stirred the hornets nest by destabilizing the middle east due to the Bush/Cheney administration.
2
The point of view here seems to be that training and equipping has failed as an alternative to the use of American forces. Are we that quick to forget that the use of American forces also failed, and at a much higher cost? Getting out is not recognized as a serious alternative, but it would both cost less and probably at least make the situation no worse. For one thing, it would mean that those in the region who we've been trying to support would be free to care or not care--fight or not fight--in their own interest rather than in some clumsy projection of our own interests.
Getting out is the responsible choice.
Getting out is the responsible choice.
1
America cannot rule the world.
How many more lives and trillions of dollars will it take before those who run this country learn this lesson?
Every day we make more enemies by bombing hospitals and destroying cities and ordinary people's lives. Every day many of our own children go to bed hungry because their parents can't find decent jobs or are being crushed by debt for things like education and medical care. Our highways and bridges are collapsing.
Millions of us realize America shows every indication it is heading toward disaster, yet we feel powerless to alter its course.
There is growing evidence that a shadowy national security state impervious to the comings and goings of politicians is actually in charge of the future and fate of our nation. It is reckless and addicted to military power, and we can see its achievements strewn over a Middle East in ruins.
Will an election next year will actually change the situation in any really significant way? I wish I could believe it will, but the last 15 years of American foreign policy suggest that five years from now we will still be in Afghanistan, still fighting ISIS, and continuing to do more "collateral damage" by our drone warfare.
How many more lives and trillions of dollars will it take before those who run this country learn this lesson?
Every day we make more enemies by bombing hospitals and destroying cities and ordinary people's lives. Every day many of our own children go to bed hungry because their parents can't find decent jobs or are being crushed by debt for things like education and medical care. Our highways and bridges are collapsing.
Millions of us realize America shows every indication it is heading toward disaster, yet we feel powerless to alter its course.
There is growing evidence that a shadowy national security state impervious to the comings and goings of politicians is actually in charge of the future and fate of our nation. It is reckless and addicted to military power, and we can see its achievements strewn over a Middle East in ruins.
Will an election next year will actually change the situation in any really significant way? I wish I could believe it will, but the last 15 years of American foreign policy suggest that five years from now we will still be in Afghanistan, still fighting ISIS, and continuing to do more "collateral damage" by our drone warfare.
3
The United States invests billions in arms and training to make local governments effective and self-sufficient. The result? Compete failure. Success only when the weapons are turned against the US.
In parallel, the US issues visas by the hundreds to allow foreigners stalk Americans in their jobs so they can be easily emulated and outsourced. Then the US picks up the social costs of the newly unemployed, both tangible and intangible, also in the billions, and winks at the corporates involved, who doubtless not just get richer, but stash the hoard in some far-away tax-free shelter. Result? Compete success.
Americans win too because all they want is less government and by golly they are getting that. A lot more (less) than they bargained for.
In parallel, the US issues visas by the hundreds to allow foreigners stalk Americans in their jobs so they can be easily emulated and outsourced. Then the US picks up the social costs of the newly unemployed, both tangible and intangible, also in the billions, and winks at the corporates involved, who doubtless not just get richer, but stash the hoard in some far-away tax-free shelter. Result? Compete success.
Americans win too because all they want is less government and by golly they are getting that. A lot more (less) than they bargained for.
4
If at first you don't succeed fail, fail, again. Since the new millennium began , it has been one failure after another. We may have the most powerful military in the world but it is good at only what it is designed to do. That is, to defeat other large military forces. After that, they need to come back home. Give up this nation building and training new armies, it is not working at all.
1
As the article says it, a major factor is leadership. The US has a long list of wishes how the leadership of those countries should look like and it does a lot to get those wishes fulfilled. The leaders of those countries must be democratic (or at least pretend to be), pro-American, have good contact with US diplomats, hate America's enemies and deal well with those minorities that the US cares about.
The problem is that such a wishlist brings bureaucratic chameleons to the top: people who are good at managing expectations but most likely not good at independent thought and strong leadership.
The problem is that such a wishlist brings bureaucratic chameleons to the top: people who are good at managing expectations but most likely not good at independent thought and strong leadership.
1
Wonder what the landscape would look like if the US had spent the same money on primary schools, higher education, medical clinics, and basic utilities in the middle east? Sounds like it would be a pretty normal place.
2
Motivation and esprit de corps trumps weapons and training. The one success we had were the Kurds. They had motivation. Secure their territory free of Arabs. What motivation does a soldier who joins up for a pay check have? Compare that to Jihadis who welcome death. The toughest fighters in the Middle East are the Israelis. Fight or be extinguished is a major motivation. The Countries they defeated had soldiers who had somewhere to run to.
2
In the US soldiers are trained as a professional and professional soldiering is an occupation and a means of livelihood. A martyr with religious fever and no fear for death have advantages in a battlefield. The war monger and merchant in the US need to recognize the limitation of American Exceptionalism and reckless foreign military intervention will only weaken the country.
2
ISIS, Boko Haram, Taliban, Al Shabbab, Al Queda are winning on all fronts. The Caliphate is being established. Why? They are zealots happy, literally, to die with a suicide vest in a Mosque or community meeting.
As Colonel Kurz said, "Give me a Division of men like that and our problems here would be over." We are losing. What to do? Does anyone know? The Joint Chiefs and Europeans have run out of ideas as our allied Armies barely fight since they drop their weapons. The real Apocalypse Now is happening. ISIS and others are committed to never ending warfare. Never ending warfare killing non Muslims.
As Colonel Kurz said, "Give me a Division of men like that and our problems here would be over." We are losing. What to do? Does anyone know? The Joint Chiefs and Europeans have run out of ideas as our allied Armies barely fight since they drop their weapons. The real Apocalypse Now is happening. ISIS and others are committed to never ending warfare. Never ending warfare killing non Muslims.
1
This is great reporting. Very interesting and informative.... $500 million here, $25 billion there, I'd bet much of that money never gets to it's intended place. This is the real corruption. We might be better off giving the money to the relief orgs. working in the Middle East. You know like Doctors With Out Borders, who we most likely just bombed....... In Iraq we were also paying militias not to fight. That probably stopped when we left. It starts to seem like real madness. One mistake after another. No end in sight.... For all these people (soldiers) leaving, they all sound the same: They don't want to be around the killing, bombing, fighting and a chance anywhere it's somewhat stable is better than staying. It's like a massive migration, a giant shift......... We probably should have stayed in Iraq and Afghanistan with large forces. But it would be for a very long time. And who knows if we had, how it would turn out. All this may have happened anyway. By now it's pretty obvious the US should have never went into Iraq. (that's an understatement) We could have put much more of an effort into Afghanistan. Although over time that too is starting to seem like was a bad idea. Once you go in, you should be prepared to stay, esp in such a volatile place. It is becoming a truly a sad scary situation., mass confusion. Maybe more people will think about all the unseen consequences and costs of our wars, esp in a world that is getting very small.
2
Simply put, our naiveté in foreign policy is reflected in our jejune belief: Money can buy support, loyalty and friendship. Yet, the more money we throw in, the more we fail, but we still continue with our old ways. When your only tool is a hammer, and then add the naïve assumptions of the current POTUS (ex-community activist and half-term Senator from one of the cesspool cities of corruption and self-dealing), you have FAILURE written all over it. The American taxpayer is suckered every step of the way, but our Mandarins in Washington are blissfully blasé about the entire affair.
2
"... central tenet of the Obama administration’s approach..."
The training of local militia-type groups to fight Washington's wars isn't a "central tenet of the Obama administration". It's standard--and worthless--military doctrine. I remember the same problem in Vietnam; when American fighters left, the ARVN collapsed like the house of cards it was.
People will not fight for something they don't believe in. Until America stops invading countries against the will of their populations, the problems will never cease.
The training of local militia-type groups to fight Washington's wars isn't a "central tenet of the Obama administration". It's standard--and worthless--military doctrine. I remember the same problem in Vietnam; when American fighters left, the ARVN collapsed like the house of cards it was.
People will not fight for something they don't believe in. Until America stops invading countries against the will of their populations, the problems will never cease.
7
It may be standard military doctrine but more importantly it is part of domestic political "doctrine" both within Washington and across the nation. It is based on both ignorance and cynical political expediency. All governments subscribe to it but the US, across the political spectrum, seems particularly prone to it. Governments choose "training" over troop deployment when the political pressure to "do something" becomes too great to resist. Results don't matter because the domestic pressure is now while outcomes are years away. For some it is an ill-founded triumph of hope over experience: for the military it means more money; for Obama, it means not getting involved in another unwinnable and unnecessary war.
I really am at a loss. The Ottoman empire figured it out. So did the British Empire , the French and I thought until last week the Russians . There is 1500 years of history lessons. If you can't isolate them , then give them time to burn themselves out. We, being the west, keep arming them . All that does is allow them to escape the answer they don't want . Peace. This isn't difficult. They are consistent.
3
Obama focused on training locals without ever believing it was going to bring "victories", for very good reasons. Training locals costs plenty, but in comparison with sending in Americans, the cost is modest. The goal was to somewhat silence the bellowing of neocon saber-rattlers and keep us out of another expensive quagmire. Enduring the criticism of environmentalists, throughout his presidency, Obama has also encouraged the fracking industry and drilling here because it lessened our dependence on ME oil and thus the need to interfere over there in the first place.
He's minimized the loss of American lives and American money as best he could. He's made rational decisions, picking the least bad choice among an array of bad choices.
He's minimized the loss of American lives and American money as best he could. He's made rational decisions, picking the least bad choice among an array of bad choices.
7
As Colin Powell sagely noted when W, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice were salivating to invade Afghanistan as part of W's mission to "wipe out global terrorism", there was no way out. Invading other countries is complicated for many reasons. Winning a battle (and landing on an aircraft carrier in a flight suit Halloween costume) just doesn't make for a sustainable solution.
When Vietnam ended, I never thought that the US would get into an even worse situation. No matter how much the US threw behind it, the South Vietnamese Army was never a match for the resolve and experience of the North Vietnamese. Sadly, some leaders do not learn from history and are doomed to repeat it. And here we are with hangovers in our hemisphere (Guantanamo) and theirs.
When Vietnam ended, I never thought that the US would get into an even worse situation. No matter how much the US threw behind it, the South Vietnamese Army was never a match for the resolve and experience of the North Vietnamese. Sadly, some leaders do not learn from history and are doomed to repeat it. And here we are with hangovers in our hemisphere (Guantanamo) and theirs.
2
The billions haven't been actually "lost." They've gone into the hands of the corporate war enablers and America's 1%.
20
We not only want to remake the world in our image, we assume the world wants to be in our image. Problem #1. Problem #2 is that we understand no image but ours.
From our President to his Cabinet members, counsellors, advisers and the poor soldier in your picture, there is zero understanding of how other people think. Everyone in the world has to think the Kardashians and Jenners and gay rights and black lives and gun rights are all that matter. But they don't.
Our social problems aren't necessarily their problems. Our interests aren't theirs and the way they approach problems are often diametrically opposed to ours. But we bulldoze on, making frustrated enemies of those who we want to help.
Given our inability to understand anyone's world but ours, perhaps we should retreat, circle the wagons, and see how long we can last.
From our President to his Cabinet members, counsellors, advisers and the poor soldier in your picture, there is zero understanding of how other people think. Everyone in the world has to think the Kardashians and Jenners and gay rights and black lives and gun rights are all that matter. But they don't.
Our social problems aren't necessarily their problems. Our interests aren't theirs and the way they approach problems are often diametrically opposed to ours. But we bulldoze on, making frustrated enemies of those who we want to help.
Given our inability to understand anyone's world but ours, perhaps we should retreat, circle the wagons, and see how long we can last.
7
'...Given our inability to understand anyone's world but ours, perhaps we should retreat, circle the wagons, and see how long we can last...'
The US is fortunate in that we have two oceans on each side of our country and an abundance of natural resources, so if we could put a force field around our country, we would last a very long time.
Not so for the rest of the world, which would either learn to get along or will exterminate each other.
None of this is the problem of the American people, who everyone else seems to hate until some dirty work needs to be done, at which point they cower behind us, while calling us names.
After all, even the French love Americans when German tanks are riding down the Champs Elysee.
The US is fortunate in that we have two oceans on each side of our country and an abundance of natural resources, so if we could put a force field around our country, we would last a very long time.
Not so for the rest of the world, which would either learn to get along or will exterminate each other.
None of this is the problem of the American people, who everyone else seems to hate until some dirty work needs to be done, at which point they cower behind us, while calling us names.
After all, even the French love Americans when German tanks are riding down the Champs Elysee.
Reality check see no evil hear no evil,man has grown more savage in last 25 years threw its own greed an power. Threw use mass media hypnosis war has increased dramtinly we need to turn down volume clean up air waves. A lot which has corrupted foreign countrys with policys of west New age of freedom was brought in 25 years ago an has corrupted many of minds an hearts. We must remember lessons of past wars . Most wars fought because of greed for power or money an wealth . Take away the source an wars will fail ,means no sale of arms of weapons mass destruction . UN needs to create internation effort in stopping selling of arms or giving either which is as bad
The political capital needed to draft all of our young men and women and send 100's of thousands of troops into foreign lands to supply security followed by managers and money to actually begin to run and transition these countries is staggering.
The political capital needed to send US weapons and trainers to foreign lands to arm and train foreign fighters backed up by drones and a small US fleet of air cover is a small percentage of our GDP. The political capital needed is so small that we hardly debate it during elections and both parties loss nothing by supporting it.
The public doesn't care that we break things as long as it doesn't impact us personally. This failing tactic has the overwhelming support of both parties and it has leaked out to the point where the public accepts it fully. We have become so nuanced in our ability to support this policy that we no longer view American airman or military personal who are actually on the ground training and arming these people as US forces.
The political capital needed to send US weapons and trainers to foreign lands to arm and train foreign fighters backed up by drones and a small US fleet of air cover is a small percentage of our GDP. The political capital needed is so small that we hardly debate it during elections and both parties loss nothing by supporting it.
The public doesn't care that we break things as long as it doesn't impact us personally. This failing tactic has the overwhelming support of both parties and it has leaked out to the point where the public accepts it fully. We have become so nuanced in our ability to support this policy that we no longer view American airman or military personal who are actually on the ground training and arming these people as US forces.
2
Wow invading Iraq in 2003 was a horrible decision. You should have listened to me and millions of other people out in the streets protesting and saying don't do it. Why exactly did the U.S. attack? Who made the decisions? What was the role of the media in cheerleading the invasion? Shouldn't the U.S. have some kind of commission of inquiry to get some answers to these questions and hold you folks back from making the same mistakes over and over and over again?
2
What did the so called war in Vietnam teach us? Police actions with our treasure and blood will never work. If a group of people want to act like savages and kill each other till they are satiated then who are we to intervene. The UN can't or won't stop civil wars, it's time we admit that we should no longer act as the worlds police. It really is all hopeless.
2
A US commander in chief is a heavy responsibility. Tough to find anyone who has the credentials. After all the political posturing and dysfunction we put up with, a President's day starts with a security briefing. Foregin policy is important as we share this world with China and Russia's influence. Our economy is simply stuck in a very low growth debt ridden scenario. No President can fix that. Hillary is mean spirited, she is not one to get along with the other side of the Isle. Jeb is a Bush enough said. So where and who is there a commander in chief to carry on our blackberry drone warfare?
1
America marched into the middle east and tried to impose its Western idea of government on medieval tribes long accustomed to warfare. Our government attempted this with little or no sensitivity to the prevailing cultures, which was an ignorant mistake most school kids would know to avoid.
Our government spent a trillion dollars, got many of our soldiers killed or maimed, and then skedaddled leaving the tribes to annihilate each other with megatons of military hardware that we dumped on them.
The result of our government's astonishingly ignorant mistake has expanded beyond mere failure. It's now a catastrophe so huge, and still growing, that a large and increasing number of Americans can't relate to it.
Somewhere in our methods of governance is a deep, insidious flaw -- a species of dark stupidity -- that our present political climate can't eradicate.
Our government spent a trillion dollars, got many of our soldiers killed or maimed, and then skedaddled leaving the tribes to annihilate each other with megatons of military hardware that we dumped on them.
The result of our government's astonishingly ignorant mistake has expanded beyond mere failure. It's now a catastrophe so huge, and still growing, that a large and increasing number of Americans can't relate to it.
Somewhere in our methods of governance is a deep, insidious flaw -- a species of dark stupidity -- that our present political climate can't eradicate.
1
The United States government under two successive presidents has dragged the American people through an ongoing, expensive and failed exercise in empire building, and for what reason, I cannot imagine. This lesson has been learned over and over again for centuries, and yet, our officials are so caught up in irrational ego and chest pounding that they can't remember even the basics of world history.
We, the American people, are not going back to war. And miraculously, we have a nation willing to step in and resolve the Middle Eastern mess, and what does our government do? Undermine her and criticize her. But Russia is our salvation right now, just as she has been the salvation for Edward Snowden. I have very little respect for the people in Washington particularly Hillary Clinton, a do-nothing who irresponsibly fomented rebellion only to watch functioning nations with law and order descend into violence and chaos. Thank God Obama did not go as far as she had wanted, or American soldiers would be on the ground there once again, destined to fly home in body bags; and all for nothing but for our collective armchair warriors' childish desire to rule the world. It's disgraceful: immature, irrational, and evil.
Feel the Bern, folks. We certainly don't need another impulsive hawk like Hillary installed to take us to complete ruin.
We, the American people, are not going back to war. And miraculously, we have a nation willing to step in and resolve the Middle Eastern mess, and what does our government do? Undermine her and criticize her. But Russia is our salvation right now, just as she has been the salvation for Edward Snowden. I have very little respect for the people in Washington particularly Hillary Clinton, a do-nothing who irresponsibly fomented rebellion only to watch functioning nations with law and order descend into violence and chaos. Thank God Obama did not go as far as she had wanted, or American soldiers would be on the ground there once again, destined to fly home in body bags; and all for nothing but for our collective armchair warriors' childish desire to rule the world. It's disgraceful: immature, irrational, and evil.
Feel the Bern, folks. We certainly don't need another impulsive hawk like Hillary installed to take us to complete ruin.
2
Time for the US to stop sustaining the hegemony of military forces throughout the world and concentrate on eliminating the fearful insurgency of guns everywhere in the wrong hands in America. Gun control at home is more important than trying to foist democracy and American military training on countries that have been tribal Muslim enclaves since the Year Dot. Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria among other countries on the Mediterranean Rim. No progress = failure, and America has failed mightily in Vietnam and the Middle East. Time to let loose the dogs of war against guns at home.
2
This article misleads the public in that it blames President Obama for all the wasteful defense spending by our nation. The article would have better served the public if the dominant role of the Republican-controlled Congress in writing the defense budget were highlighted.
To understand how the Republican-controlled Congress is distorting the defense budget for political gain, go here:
http://tinyurl.com/GOP-Defense-Bill-Gimmicks
here:
http://tinyurl.com/what-budget-reforms
and here:
http://tinyurl.com/Obama-veto-warning .
To understand how the Republican-controlled Congress is distorting the defense budget for political gain, go here:
http://tinyurl.com/GOP-Defense-Bill-Gimmicks
here:
http://tinyurl.com/what-budget-reforms
and here:
http://tinyurl.com/Obama-veto-warning .
21
Blame game? It is neither the executive branch nor congress, democrat nor republican; they all share the blame of this travesty of idiocy.
1
Yes, yes and yes. Thank you in pointing out how the media tries hard to make the news rather than reporting it.
1
Republicans deserve all the blame for the defense budget shenanigans.
Almost all the US military interventions abroad, whether directly or through proxy, failed miserably because none of them perhaps was a US war fought for self-defense or any worthy cause. It was merely to project the US military power to buttress its self-proclaimed global preeminence, that could have been perhaps better served had the US spent even a fraction of what it spent abroad on development back home. But the Washington establishment's priorities have always been different.
20
Please, no more political trainees in the White House, in the US of A, isn't there one intelligent common sense person willing to take. on the elected clowns in congress for starters, then educated enough about the world to know, for basic starters, the tragic history of Asia and the Middle East, and from that understanding, realize that western cultural values will never work in those areas!
7
I agree with this article but you seem to suggest that we engage in a large scale
and long term combat with our own troops. I believe we did that an how did it work out. Oh now I remember we caused the mess were in. I am not sure that
any of this has work out. I worry that Putin may be right, we should have supported the strong man in charge.
I feel we don't understand their culture, and tried to think of these people as if they are or want to be us. Maybe they do, but like all of us they must incorporate some of their own culture. I feel that is where we get into trouble. The second problem is this is a Civil War and new strong man must emerge unfortunately it will not always be the one we want or better than the one we had.
I feel the best strategy may be to try and buy them off, I feel that requires being able to stomach there actions against their own people and our role in it. Does anyone other than President Bush feel the Iraq or America is better off with out Sadam Hussein. Now Russia is setting up a base in the Middle East and
seems to be hopping to engage America in a confrontation. What did we get for our investment a worse situation. Maybe this is best we can do until it plays itself out. Quite frankly the alternatives scare me more.
Chuck From Ohio
and long term combat with our own troops. I believe we did that an how did it work out. Oh now I remember we caused the mess were in. I am not sure that
any of this has work out. I worry that Putin may be right, we should have supported the strong man in charge.
I feel we don't understand their culture, and tried to think of these people as if they are or want to be us. Maybe they do, but like all of us they must incorporate some of their own culture. I feel that is where we get into trouble. The second problem is this is a Civil War and new strong man must emerge unfortunately it will not always be the one we want or better than the one we had.
I feel the best strategy may be to try and buy them off, I feel that requires being able to stomach there actions against their own people and our role in it. Does anyone other than President Bush feel the Iraq or America is better off with out Sadam Hussein. Now Russia is setting up a base in the Middle East and
seems to be hopping to engage America in a confrontation. What did we get for our investment a worse situation. Maybe this is best we can do until it plays itself out. Quite frankly the alternatives scare me more.
Chuck From Ohio
7
How about learning curve? The USA has none.
In the 35 years between the end of WWII and 1980 the US did three good and smart things in Foreverstan (the Middle East). We recognized Israel, saved Egypt from invasion by Britain, France, and Israel, and established peace between Israel and Egypt in 1979. In the 35 years after 1980 we have done evil and been stupid. Think of the death and misery our national security military industrial complex has created by spreading guns and militarism throughout Foreverstan. Hundreds of thousands of Muslims have died, millions have been forced into camps, homes and businesses destroyed. We have given arms and money to Al Queda and other such groups and arms and money to Foreverstan regimes that support Al Queda and other such groups.
Our interference in civil wars has cost lives and money. Instead of doing no harm, we have done nothing but harm in the last 35 years. And we never seem to learn from our mistakes. Withdraw all troops from Foreverstan now. Sell no more arms, except to Israel. Create a Marshall Plan for Foreverstan. Do good. Do no harm. Be smart. Learn from past mistakes.
In the 35 years between the end of WWII and 1980 the US did three good and smart things in Foreverstan (the Middle East). We recognized Israel, saved Egypt from invasion by Britain, France, and Israel, and established peace between Israel and Egypt in 1979. In the 35 years after 1980 we have done evil and been stupid. Think of the death and misery our national security military industrial complex has created by spreading guns and militarism throughout Foreverstan. Hundreds of thousands of Muslims have died, millions have been forced into camps, homes and businesses destroyed. We have given arms and money to Al Queda and other such groups and arms and money to Foreverstan regimes that support Al Queda and other such groups.
Our interference in civil wars has cost lives and money. Instead of doing no harm, we have done nothing but harm in the last 35 years. And we never seem to learn from our mistakes. Withdraw all troops from Foreverstan now. Sell no more arms, except to Israel. Create a Marshall Plan for Foreverstan. Do good. Do no harm. Be smart. Learn from past mistakes.
9
It is obvious at this point that the Middle East has been a disaster for America and for the Arabs. Military action is not the answer, it has only made the situation worse. We are hated by Arabs for a reason. Our thirst for cheap oil led to a series of bad decisions - namely propping up oppressive dictators who in turn opened the oil spigots to feed our greed for cheap fuel. Is it really any wonder why groups like ISIS hate us? We can't bomb our way out of this now, it only makes it worse. They are fighting for a cause they believe in. How is it possible that a rag tag group of revolutionaries can humiliate the most powerful nation on earth? Just look at 1776 and the American Revolution to get the answer. We did the same thing to the powerful British Empire and ISIS is going to do the same to us. They have passion on their side. We are mercenaries.
128
The only flaw in your reasoning is drones did not exist in 1776. All the passion in the world cannot outrun a missile.
Agreed on everything else you said.
Agreed on everything else you said.
You are sooo right.Many years ago there was somebody,in Argentina I think,who said something along the lines of "Las ideas no se degüellan", you cannot cut idea's throats.Right or wrong,the ISIS forces are driven by an idea.The US decision to be on the side of Israel has given us a lot of grief plus cost us a lot of money,we look like chumps and In the long run we cannot keep spending the kind of money we are spending now.That's the way empires fade into history.We won't be an exception.
" ... With alarming frequency in recent years, thousands of American-trained security forces in the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia have collapsed, stalled or defected, ..."
Recent years is quite nicely put.
In reality this was a problem that that was even old in the Vietnam war when the South Vietnamese simply fell apart the second US soldiers went for a pee.
But is also an issue that is not only a problem for the US as it has been an issue that goes back thousands of years.
No foreign force has ever been able to have a proxy war run for a long time in place that is far away and which it did not even attempt to understand in the first.
And that, in a nutshell, is the US problem.
If you believe that everyone on this planet works and thinks the same and has the same loyalties as Joe Average in the US, you cannot and will not ever be able to make people in other places, regions and cultures fight for your cause.
Because these people, no matter how much money you spent on them, will never fight for themselves but will always be mercenaries for hire to fight for a foreign cause.
Recent years is quite nicely put.
In reality this was a problem that that was even old in the Vietnam war when the South Vietnamese simply fell apart the second US soldiers went for a pee.
But is also an issue that is not only a problem for the US as it has been an issue that goes back thousands of years.
No foreign force has ever been able to have a proxy war run for a long time in place that is far away and which it did not even attempt to understand in the first.
And that, in a nutshell, is the US problem.
If you believe that everyone on this planet works and thinks the same and has the same loyalties as Joe Average in the US, you cannot and will not ever be able to make people in other places, regions and cultures fight for your cause.
Because these people, no matter how much money you spent on them, will never fight for themselves but will always be mercenaries for hire to fight for a foreign cause.
15
It not just this administration. Every administration going back to the Vietnam era has sought to build up local forces that can take the place of US troops, either after the latter have been withdrawn, or in place of intervention by US combat forces. The fundamental problem is that these local forces have always lacked the will to fight and die. They are given arms and training, but they lack morale, esprit de corps, and, in many cases, courage. Add to this the fact that the enemy, however vicious they may be, can always pose as anti-imperialists and liberators (while the local forces are seen as US puppets), and you have a recipe for defeat. Defeat every time.
The lesson in all this: don't wage war, directly or by proxy, in these God-forsaken places. Conserve American blood and treasure whenever possible.
The lesson in all this: don't wage war, directly or by proxy, in these God-forsaken places. Conserve American blood and treasure whenever possible.
13
Conserve is the key word, as in "Conservative". Too bad there are none remaining in US Politics and Government. Wish we still had ya, Ron Paul
1
The problem is that Obama has too much sympathy with Islam without any understanding of how people think in the Middle East. He does not seem to realise that the loyalties of many of them is not to an area of land bud to an ideology. To them whatever flavour of Islam they adhere to is what controls all of their lives. They live and breathe it.
It is naive in the extreme to believe that giving military training to many in the Arab States will have the desired outcome. It makes them more efficient fighters but it does nothing to train their way of thinking. That is why there has been so many instances of so-called allies turning on their benefactors.
It also happens with many immigrants to various countries. They are happy to accept the secular benefits of their host countries but many will immediately rise up at the slightest perception of insult to their religion.
In fact, Obama has done an enormous disservice to the World and in particular, added to the threat to Europe with so many military trained men coming in with the hordes of immigrants. I am so glad that Obama is coming to the end of his second term before he does anymore damage.
It is naive in the extreme to believe that giving military training to many in the Arab States will have the desired outcome. It makes them more efficient fighters but it does nothing to train their way of thinking. That is why there has been so many instances of so-called allies turning on their benefactors.
It also happens with many immigrants to various countries. They are happy to accept the secular benefits of their host countries but many will immediately rise up at the slightest perception of insult to their religion.
In fact, Obama has done an enormous disservice to the World and in particular, added to the threat to Europe with so many military trained men coming in with the hordes of immigrants. I am so glad that Obama is coming to the end of his second term before he does anymore damage.
8
Imagine how many more hearts and minds the US would have won if those billions were spent on infrastructure improvements for those countries rather than shoring up militaries.
1. History shows that the US has an extremely poor track record when it comes to choosing the correct political side to support.
2. History shows that citizens support those groups that provide necessities of life - reliable electricity and water; food supplies; healthcare.
Given those two facts, it seems that the US would do a lot better by spending their billions to build up countries rather than to help in their destruction.
1. History shows that the US has an extremely poor track record when it comes to choosing the correct political side to support.
2. History shows that citizens support those groups that provide necessities of life - reliable electricity and water; food supplies; healthcare.
Given those two facts, it seems that the US would do a lot better by spending their billions to build up countries rather than to help in their destruction.
8
Hisotrical fact: During the Iraq war we invested billions in infrastructure but that effort failed as well. There is no use building roads when there is a sectarian battle raging on. It only enables both sides to get to the killing fields faster.
1
There can be no doubt, that the people in charge of the USA's Foreign Policy are beyond CLUELESS
1
Just because the US wants things to work in a certain way, and pours billions into it, should not be considered a guarantee of success. It is not at all clear from here that any of our present or former allies in these misadventures share our goals and aspirations -- or ever will. Having grown up in Chicago and living for decades in Canada I am occasionally startled at how my friends and neighbors see the world -- and superficially this looks like any place in Ohio or Kentucky where I used to live and work. Did anyone ever ask those folks what THEY wanted or how THEY saw the situation? And if this happened, was any attention paid? Somehow I doubt it. And I suspect that until we collectively realize that our perspective is just one arbitrary way of many to interpreting the world around us -- things will not get any better.
8
Just to put the 65 billion dollars the US spent on training police and the army in perspective. The GDP of the entire country was 23 billion dollars. The US spent 2.5 times the total output of the country on the army and the army cant stop a few hundred of the enemy with small arms.
A better idea may have been to just double everyones salary in the country and just make them promise not to shoot each other. It would have been far cheaper than blowing up $10,000 trucks with $100,000 bombs and billion dollar planes.
A better idea may have been to just double everyones salary in the country and just make them promise not to shoot each other. It would have been far cheaper than blowing up $10,000 trucks with $100,000 bombs and billion dollar planes.
7
Not as easy as it sounds. If they got a huge infusion of cash they would just use it to continue fighting along their ideological lines.
2
And in 2008, instead of giving the Banksters $750 bil, if each citizen of the USA were given $80,000, the out come would've been much much much better.
IIt's all about raping the citizens through taxes and then not giving anything back
IIt's all about raping the citizens through taxes and then not giving anything back
1
Maybe we should stop nation building the world when we can't control our own country. Just look how and why we fought in Vietnam and now we accept them and are seeking a deeper friendship.
3
When billions have been wasted, some in Congress think that more money, more military spending and aid is the answer, largely because they are bankrolled by people who profit from this spending and because they don't care what works. They care about their donors and the next election. That's why we need to get money out of politics.
If money leaves politics and we want to help the people whom we have afflicted with war and privation we must spend 10 times more money on educating the population in these countries than we spend on military equipment, training etc. Build schools, not armies. Schools outlast armies. This is not sexy. This is not how we have operated in the world. We have not learned.
If money leaves politics and we want to help the people whom we have afflicted with war and privation we must spend 10 times more money on educating the population in these countries than we spend on military equipment, training etc. Build schools, not armies. Schools outlast armies. This is not sexy. This is not how we have operated in the world. We have not learned.
7
During the Iraq war we invested heavily in infrastructure but that effort failed as well. There is no use building roads when there is a sectarian battle raging on. It only enables both sides to get to the killing fields faster.
Anxiously awaiting to read of Hillary's and Donald's positions on the middle east. They are both deftly avoiding our nation's biggest threat.
2
Our government is so disheartening. We don't have $250,000. to sustain programs in our high school but there are limitless billions to waste overseas because of political grandstanding from not too intelligent and paid off politicians. Unfortunately, we have an uneducated and disinterested and easily manipulated electorate to blame or else we would get rid of these self centered elected officials.
11
I don't fault the military, as its training methods clearly work very well for itself. I don't even blame Obama, as no one really feels like deploying American troops to these places anymore. But it's a strategy that's doomed to fail, simply because there isn't anyone worth training in many of these places.
3
A lesson was not learned in Viet Nam - Just one country to subdue but we couldn't do it. Now in the Middle East we have multiple countries, fronts, reluctant allies; a much larger task.
Madness.
Madness.
8
I guess we don't have anything better to do with tax payers money. Over many centuries, every foreign power who has tried to shape or conquer Afghanistan as failed miserably. There is little of the way of loyalty extended to foreign powers. They will take your billions of dollars, smile, and speak the words that you want to hear. Behind your back, they are laughing all the way to their Swiss bank accounts.
93
If the cities of Chicago and Detroit had even half the money we have set fire to in Afghanistan and Iraq, not to mention given to corrupt warlords, both cities would be a long way towards solving their problems.
The fatal flaw in the very core of US military programs is that they are geared to instill a desire to fight against,rather than for, something. Civilian programs and leadership can build something to fight for. We, military, have the ultimate mission to destroy no matter how many new schools we build.
Nation building requires providing the opportunity to develop a social and physical infrastructure with the inhabitants. A task nearly impossible to do at bayonet point and one the military is generally unfit to perform effectively.
Nation building requires providing the opportunity to develop a social and physical infrastructure with the inhabitants. A task nearly impossible to do at bayonet point and one the military is generally unfit to perform effectively.
4
And the goals no one can accomplish when there is an enemy dedicated to tearing down whatever is build.
This is just another example of why we need to stay out of the Middle East. We cannot fight there forever. The only force that deserves our help is the Kurds. Help them and, at least there may be a stable place. Help Jordan with refugees. There is little else we can do. The groups we train do not want to fight. So, there are three other choices. We go to war again. This is not going to happen. The Europeans can build a wall to keep people in the Middle East to deal with the problems. That is up to them. The third is some sort of no fly zone in Syria. We could try. It may keep Assad out since he has the planes. How this will keep out ISIS, I do not know.
1
The ONLY mission or objective the U.S. should have in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria is to remove or destroy as many weapons, as much ammunition, and military equipment as is possible, and then leave the area to the locals to figure out themselves. The U.S. should not be training anyone, arming anyone, or dropping bombs on anyone. The U.S. should be using diplomatic persuasion to get the Saudis to reel in ISIS (no one doubts that Saudis are the driving force behind this movement) and get the Saudis and other Sunni states to talk with Iran and Shia led Iraq on living together peacefully on the same planet.
5
Too much reliance on a Army training and not enough guerrilla training. In other words the Army and Marines rely too much on regular warfare training by troops who fight the typical war. Or the Surge failed.
1
The problem with our "training" is that it arrogantly presumes the " trainees" want to fight! They don't! They are not interested in a secular democracy or anything closely resembling it. They are sympathetic to the theocrats we want them to fight and they fear them. Nothing we can do and no money we can pay can make these individuals want to fight.
Our arrogance and naïveté coupled with our incompetence leads us to disaster every time. While our own people struggle, our roads and bridges crumble we waste money in countries wherein the people, not all but many, would rather kill us and our secular ways offend them. Oh, they are happy to take our money but they hate us nevereltheless.
We need to get the heck out of the Middle East. It is infecting us and destroying us. Bring our money and our people home and let the Middle East sort itself out.
Our arrogance and naïveté coupled with our incompetence leads us to disaster every time. While our own people struggle, our roads and bridges crumble we waste money in countries wherein the people, not all but many, would rather kill us and our secular ways offend them. Oh, they are happy to take our money but they hate us nevereltheless.
We need to get the heck out of the Middle East. It is infecting us and destroying us. Bring our money and our people home and let the Middle East sort itself out.
12
This is simply another side effect of the "All-volunteer" military. We think we can buy what we want or need instead of sending OUR people to take care of the problem. When we have blood on the line we become more selective about what we're willing to sacrifice for.
The segment of our nation that doesn't want to pay taxes and refuses to serve in our military has nothing to lose except the hot air that escapes with their constant whining.
The segment of our nation that doesn't want to pay taxes and refuses to serve in our military has nothing to lose except the hot air that escapes with their constant whining.
3
This whole situation is hopeless. Let's leave aside the fact that we can't control the absolute messes we ourselves created (thanks, Cheney), and face the facts: if the soldiers we train won't fight, and American's are sick of sending us to fight, what's the answer? All these billions--and the right simply wants to get even more involved. And what about our famous deficit?
What would happen if we pulled a Rand Paul and withdrew completely? We certainly aren't doing a shred of good with the training programs. The old adage, "teach a man to fish and he has food for life" certainly doesn't apply here.
We can't keep doing for others what they won't do for themselves. The region is too complicated, the factions too numerous, the allegiances always shifting. We're wasting time and treasure investing in a region in flames when we need to tackle problems at home.
Ask most Americans what they think, and I think the answer is, we need to get out.
What would happen if we pulled a Rand Paul and withdrew completely? We certainly aren't doing a shred of good with the training programs. The old adage, "teach a man to fish and he has food for life" certainly doesn't apply here.
We can't keep doing for others what they won't do for themselves. The region is too complicated, the factions too numerous, the allegiances always shifting. We're wasting time and treasure investing in a region in flames when we need to tackle problems at home.
Ask most Americans what they think, and I think the answer is, we need to get out.
300
"Ask most Americans what they think, and I think the answer is, we need to get out."
I would like to think that's the case, but a recent poll showed that Fox News is the most watched TV station in America. What better proof do we need that a majority of Americans have been "dumbed down" to the point that they no longer have critical thinking skills.
The trash we watch on television reflects who we are.
I would like to think that's the case, but a recent poll showed that Fox News is the most watched TV station in America. What better proof do we need that a majority of Americans have been "dumbed down" to the point that they no longer have critical thinking skills.
The trash we watch on television reflects who we are.
2
We need to get out and leave them there. No need to add to our problems.
Let me see if I get it right. Every time Obama messes up, it is Cheney's fault.
But isn't it Joe Biden who is the current vice president?
I am no admirer of Cheney, I wish he had never seen the inside of any government building. But the president now is Obama, has been for almost seven years, and the vice president is Joe Biden whose son sits on the board of a Ukrainian company, no doubt giving them excellent advice.
And guess what, the Ukrainian company is an oil company!
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/05/bidens-son-gets-ukrainian-o...
Democrats, PLEASE, please, don't be so partisan. Remember that we are all Americans, and that even includes Republicans, and ahem, whites.
But isn't it Joe Biden who is the current vice president?
I am no admirer of Cheney, I wish he had never seen the inside of any government building. But the president now is Obama, has been for almost seven years, and the vice president is Joe Biden whose son sits on the board of a Ukrainian company, no doubt giving them excellent advice.
And guess what, the Ukrainian company is an oil company!
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/05/bidens-son-gets-ukrainian-o...
Democrats, PLEASE, please, don't be so partisan. Remember that we are all Americans, and that even includes Republicans, and ahem, whites.
1
Billions for foreign adventures, while programs such as Medicare, aid for schools, and investments in infrasture are cut. Jobs programs? No way, regime change is what this government is all about, whether run by Republicans or Democrats.
25
Great reporting, along with your coverage of the hospital airstrike in Kunduz. The problem with training starts at the top - Generals and Admirals who see the task of training foreign armies as a round hole into which they will force the square peg of the American way of training soldiers and fighting wars. But other countries - and armies - have other cultures. That the highest echelons of our military leadership still don't get that basic concept, so many years after 9-11, is incredible. And this cultural blindness trickles down to the lowliest privates and sergeants who actually conduct the training.
2
The United States' policy of perpetual war, modified thankfully somewhat by President Obama, is symbolized by the hundreds of military interventions around the world over the last 100 years. So while the US wages war here, there and ultimately everywhere, the Chinese are trying to build railroads and canals in South America and exporting its own technological prowess elsewhere. China knows what is in its national interests and we are quite clueless. The United States has for years seen its national security interests as global putting it into direct conflict with the regional interests of other nations or not even acknowledging those other interests exist. The Republican controlled Congress and most of the Republican Party's presidential candidates not only exhibit abysmal ignorance of the world but follow the lead of the discredited Dick Cheney who doesn't know when to shut up in advocating a "muscular" military foreign policy, a policy that is a substitute for thought and historically a profound failure.
15
hello Elliott Jacobson Claymont, DE....
yours is perhaps the wisest comment out of thousands i have read in the NYT. too bad it came late and no one will see it.
the comparison of our cheneyesque "muscular"...read "military" foreign policy...and the foreign policy of the chinese who build infrastructure in poorer countries, and thereby give the natives what they want and need...read water, sewers, electricity, transportation...the comparison highlights who is smart and who is stupid. aaaarrrrrgh.
yours is perhaps the wisest comment out of thousands i have read in the NYT. too bad it came late and no one will see it.
the comparison of our cheneyesque "muscular"...read "military" foreign policy...and the foreign policy of the chinese who build infrastructure in poorer countries, and thereby give the natives what they want and need...read water, sewers, electricity, transportation...the comparison highlights who is smart and who is stupid. aaaarrrrrgh.
1
Sounds like the Iraqis have de facto divided themselves along the lines Joe Biden suggested years ago. Particularly so as American airmen do the flying that enables them to stand back from the fighting. This three-state division should be formalized. Let the Iraqis determine their own fate, without the loss of any more U.S. blood and treasure.
4
Yes. Partition has proved to be such a peace-bringing plan. From the carving up of the Austria-Hungarian empire to India vs. Pakistan and the fate of Yugoslavia.
In the Middle East and Afghanistan U.S. policy failed because of fault lines.They were cultural and sectarian in the Middle East.There were tribal in Afghanistan. The Sunni-Shia split defines conflict throughout the Arab world. It is impossible to overcome this chasm.There is not a conflict that is not defined by this schism.There is no military policy that can succeed The only answer is difficult negotiation. The fatal flaw of the disastrous Bush Iraq invasion was the fundamental Neo Con failure to grasp this. The current problem is not failed U.S.leadership its cultural reality.
In Afghanistan the fault lines are between ethnic and warlord entities. Historically these two factors have dominated Afghan history.There can be no foreign induced military solution. There must be local accommodation.The here has always been a xenophobic element which renders foreign influence non-existent when their armies leave.
The final factor is that soldiers trained by the U.S. join the army,not because of idealogical commitment, but for economic necessity. They are no match for the zealots they fight against. The have no cause greater than their own monetary circumstance
In Afghanistan the fault lines are between ethnic and warlord entities. Historically these two factors have dominated Afghan history.There can be no foreign induced military solution. There must be local accommodation.The here has always been a xenophobic element which renders foreign influence non-existent when their armies leave.
The final factor is that soldiers trained by the U.S. join the army,not because of idealogical commitment, but for economic necessity. They are no match for the zealots they fight against. The have no cause greater than their own monetary circumstance
52
Yes, the ethnic chasm is huge, but you're asking the wrong question. What we should be asking ourselves is: What business does US have by inserting ourselves there?
If you recall, all these were started from 9/11 when Bin Laden used the al-Quada machine to declare war on us. Bush took that "blank check", mission-creep it, and invade Iraq. Afghanistan should have been our goal, and the killing of Bin Laden and the elimination of those on the al-Quada leadership should have been our only checklist. But Bush diverted all our attention and resources to Iraq. Along the way came Arab Spring, and Obama mission-creep it to take up the Bush mantra of spreading democracy and people-power, and look what it got us now, in Syria, Egypt and more.
Man, just saying all these make me sick. And we never stop to realize how dangerous these mission-creeps can be, all we hear is the brouhaha and everyone wants to go in to be the hero that the locals would love. Guess what, the locals (no matter which side they're on) hate us anyways. Now, go figure.
If you recall, all these were started from 9/11 when Bin Laden used the al-Quada machine to declare war on us. Bush took that "blank check", mission-creep it, and invade Iraq. Afghanistan should have been our goal, and the killing of Bin Laden and the elimination of those on the al-Quada leadership should have been our only checklist. But Bush diverted all our attention and resources to Iraq. Along the way came Arab Spring, and Obama mission-creep it to take up the Bush mantra of spreading democracy and people-power, and look what it got us now, in Syria, Egypt and more.
Man, just saying all these make me sick. And we never stop to realize how dangerous these mission-creeps can be, all we hear is the brouhaha and everyone wants to go in to be the hero that the locals would love. Guess what, the locals (no matter which side they're on) hate us anyways. Now, go figure.
1
Basically, we want to win these wars more than they do.
Hey Tiddle, In my world the decision to invade is regarded as a war crime.I was just analyzing why after the insanity it was "unwinnable" whatever that means.
As we said in Watergate days, for those who have just joined us, follow the money
WHO got paid for this regardless of outcomes?
One should expect politically preferred vendors ans intermediaries
in the Bush war yeas we heard much about Halliburton
Who are tie Dems' Halliburtons?
WHO got paid for this regardless of outcomes?
One should expect politically preferred vendors ans intermediaries
in the Bush war yeas we heard much about Halliburton
Who are tie Dems' Halliburtons?
3
The individuals in the 'cult' known as American keep drinking the Kool-Aid and it looks like they're enjoying it more-and-more. I think Huxley was right, and by that I mean, we as a people have become distracted by anything that might cause us to fantasize about how great we are. We're not grea. We're foolish minions looking to get high so that we don't have to deal with the reality that is knows as America.
We really don't need an oppressor anymore, because we voluntarily fork over our God given rights.
We really don't need an oppressor anymore, because we voluntarily fork over our God given rights.
4
Sometimes it's better to leave tyrants in power than to insist upon and force this chimera of Democracy to places on this earth that have no concept of, and worse, no interest in.
4
Mr Obama is smarter then me and knows more than me. So I don't know what he should do or not do. But one statement I can make in confidence: I was very disappointed when he accepted the Peace Nobel, and I still think he should return it. That would increase his credibility more than anything else.
1
So then US forces are helping out by bombing an NGO hospital run by Westerns. We obviously have no idea anymore what in the World we are doing.
3
The problem is the low level of intelligence and know-how amongst Obama's military and foreign policy advisors. The US tends to live in a bubble and those charged with advising on foreign/military issues have CONSISTENTLY got it wrong for a few decades now. If I'm wrong, please tell me where.
Too much arrogance and ignorance.
Too much arrogance and ignorance.
3
Here are the best two quotes:
“Our track record at building security forces over the past 15 years is miserable,” said Karl W. Eikenberry.
Vali Nasr ... said the prevailing belief now among Shiites was that saving Anbar was not worth “the blood of our children.”
With all due respect, we have wasted supertankers of American blood and hundreds of billions of dollars fighting other peoples' wars for the past 50 years. These wars have not been worth one drop of American blood!
The question which ought to be answered is, why do the media keep presenting these wars as the responsibility of the United States? Have we ever been compensated for our loss of blood or treasure? Has there ever been a net positive result from American entanglements after World War II?
These conflicts are never simple, never tractable, and never worth our blood and treasure.
The media should shine a light on the players, especially those who profit from wars. But the media should never advocate for entangling our nation in other nations' conflicts.
“Our track record at building security forces over the past 15 years is miserable,” said Karl W. Eikenberry.
Vali Nasr ... said the prevailing belief now among Shiites was that saving Anbar was not worth “the blood of our children.”
With all due respect, we have wasted supertankers of American blood and hundreds of billions of dollars fighting other peoples' wars for the past 50 years. These wars have not been worth one drop of American blood!
The question which ought to be answered is, why do the media keep presenting these wars as the responsibility of the United States? Have we ever been compensated for our loss of blood or treasure? Has there ever been a net positive result from American entanglements after World War II?
These conflicts are never simple, never tractable, and never worth our blood and treasure.
The media should shine a light on the players, especially those who profit from wars. But the media should never advocate for entangling our nation in other nations' conflicts.
9
Sounds like the South Vietnamese Army, doesn't it? That was slightly before my time - so, no I am not one of those spoiled brats of of the sixties. But history appears to repeats itself. If Russia wishes to bankrupt itself on an endless war, we should welcome it as our enemies watched our imbroglios here there and everywhere. These are unwinnable wars and the American hillbilly ought to have learn his lesson now. Oh, yes. Terrorism. Oregon was a perfect example of the threats facing us. A congress that can't pass a budget. A president that touts our economic recovery of service sector jobs. A Supreme Court that plays politics. All such great examples for the world to watch. Let's take care of own back yard now and let wealthy countries like Russia, Saudi Arabia and China spin their wheels. This is the one thing I've liked about Obama. It appears this newspaper is going to support the Military Industrial Complex and the middle classes will again be hoodwinked. Given their vacuity, perhaps they deserve it. Why don't you write another incendiary article about Black Lives Matter? Those were manufactured as quickly as the number of American lives you wish to kill on the foreign battlefields.
3
We cannot train Sunni and Shia for the fight we want them to fight. War goes beyond guns and to a heaven we supposed saviors don't comprehend. Better we should repair our own. How much proof of that do we need?
2
I think that in order for U.S. military training of indigenous troops to succeed, the client government installed by the U.S. must not be tainted by corruption (David Petraeus regularly made large cash payments to bribe officials and warlords), have the support of its citizens and a strong enough central government to establish firm civilian control within its borders. This has usually worked by Inserting or backing brutal dictatorships The task is made much more difficult where the U.S. has committed aggression against that country, killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, used military occupation, destroyed essential non-military infrastructure that makes life barely tolerable for them, tortured the population or committed atrocities and then withdrew leaving the country in complete ruins without any meaningful support (financial or otherwise) to rebuild what was destroyed. The military should have learned that lesson just from South Vietnam alone. The corrupt governments we installed never had the support of its citizens that we bombed, murdered or placed in concentration camps.
4
It didn't start with Obama. We'd spent over 40 billion on the Iraqi army before Bush left office. The whole conception is flawed and while Obama is to be criticized for allowing the charade to continue the only alternative to using these proxies is to send US troops back into combat and there is no general enthusiasm for that either in the administration or amongst the public at large. The fundamental problem is the one that history teaches. Once you start wars it's very difficult to stop them because political, military and technological determinism take over. Who amongst these levies is going to give his life to save the corrupt messes that Iraq and Afghanistan are? Didn't we learn anything from Vietnam? The US spent a lot of time laughing at the Soviet Union for getting embroiled in Afghanistan but we've allowed ourselves to be sucked into a similar situation even if we have more resources to draw upon. None of these conflicts present an existential threat to the US so the sensible but controversial thing to do would be to pull the plug on all of them, leave and then deal with whatever new reality ultimately emerges.
252
Let us remember that at one point the British were leaving (yet again) Afghanistan. A troop of 18,000 men, women & children entered the Khyber pass in Afghanistan. One survivor made to the Pakistan end of the Khyber.
@Oliver Graham
Well Afghanistan isn't called the graveyard of empires for nothing. Ultimately the British settled for sitting on the borders and burning a few villages whenever the Afghans made a nuisance of themselves. You can read all about it in Churchill's the Malakand Field Force.
WW 2 and Vietnam are much more powerful examples of the inability to stop wars. By the end of 1942 it was obvious that Japan and Germany had lost the war and yet they continued fighting for another two and half years. The Vietnam war went on for about six years after it was clearly lost.
Well Afghanistan isn't called the graveyard of empires for nothing. Ultimately the British settled for sitting on the borders and burning a few villages whenever the Afghans made a nuisance of themselves. You can read all about it in Churchill's the Malakand Field Force.
WW 2 and Vietnam are much more powerful examples of the inability to stop wars. By the end of 1942 it was obvious that Japan and Germany had lost the war and yet they continued fighting for another two and half years. The Vietnam war went on for about six years after it was clearly lost.
Makes sense - but what about the "reasons" (aka, excuses) to stay: the effect on shipping, the price and availability of oil, the security of Israel, the export of terrorism. and the rest of the lot? The key questions is this: do we achieve these goals by repeated failing? If these are not the actual goals, what are? And who stands to gain by it?
Follow the money.
Follow the money.
Trying to caulk thousand year old cultural fault lines with military solutions is either a fool's or brutal dictator's errand. We don't belong in any of those places.
83
The whole problem put in a nutshell! Congratulations!
How many foreign forces have the U.S. trained in the last 20 years? I wish that money had been spent on training teachers, engineers, medical personnel, science. and the humanities.
141
It would be cheaper to bring their youth here for education than it is to send our youth there for combat.
We have been at war somewhere since Dec. 7, 1941. It's time to bring the troops home and accept the idea that we can't fix everything.
84
Correction--we have been at war many, many times BEORE December 7, 1941. For decades, we made a practice of invading Latin American countries as well as 'defeating' Spain in order to extend our overseas hegemony.
Charlie, it is not the case that we are even trying to fix everything. That is a fantasy.
Why is the US allied with the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and not with India, the world's largest democracy? Why are we allied with Saudi Arabia which does not allow women to drive and at odds with Iran which has more women than men in its universities? Watch the Iranian movie Secret Ballot:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_Ballot_(film)
The ideals that we pretend to promote are just talk. What we are following and always have is military goals, immediate or in the offing. And the tragedy is that the military goals are not achieved whereas goals of peace and cooperation, even love, WOULD have.
Why is the US allied with the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and not with India, the world's largest democracy? Why are we allied with Saudi Arabia which does not allow women to drive and at odds with Iran which has more women than men in its universities? Watch the Iranian movie Secret Ballot:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_Ballot_(film)
The ideals that we pretend to promote are just talk. What we are following and always have is military goals, immediate or in the offing. And the tragedy is that the military goals are not achieved whereas goals of peace and cooperation, even love, WOULD have.
2
Another foreign policy fiasco. Another economic fiasco. Another intelligence fiasco. Just another day at Mr. Obama's White house. Next step: Put our close allies Iran in change of foreign policy and defence.
4
oh, and every other president before him..
One intractable problem in these recurring Dien Bien Phu scenarios is this: Americans are seen as the greedy pigs whose military/industrial complex will benefit from the convenient pose of helping people fight for their "freedom." Let Iraq and Afghanistan go over to the Islamic fundamentalists. Neither are worth even one American solderi's life. As we may have learned in the Southeast Asian debacle, eventually even the most hardline anti-American regime will have to do commerce with us.
14
This country is locked into the global worship of greed and the systematic transfer of public treasure (taxpayer and borrowed wealth) into private hands (the infamous MIC), wrapped in faux patriotism and effectively sold to a gullible, largely ignorant public as "In America's Interest". Obama, in his recent "angry" statement about the Oregon shooting, again comes across like a windup doll whose battery is running down, mouthing the same redundant platitudes about gun violence that he mouths about Syria, Iran and virtually everything else. He seems to have practiced his podium skills by watching CNN's Wolf Blitzer, the first humanoid robot among us. As my idea of what an American president should be, Obama has been an "empty suit." He's used his race as a shield to deflect and excuse his critical flaws. Between professional mediocrities like him, Boehner, McConnell, Reid, Schumer, Pelosi and too many others to list--our so-called "leaders"--it's no wonder a colossal fool like Trump, whose rhetoric is world-class rubbish, has been elevated in polls and actually draws large crowds cheering as he bloviates; or on the flip side, Bernie Sanders, with not a chance of being nominated, can speak "truthiness" (it may not be true, but it "feels" true), and draw so much attention away from the re-tread favorite, HRC. Watergate long ago murdered politics as an American ideal, and Citizens United has destroyed electoral democracy; this country is headed for the ash heap of history.
9
The staggering hypocrisy inherent in US foreign policy makes the trope "democracy building" that much more repugnant.
The United States Armed Forces defends America period! We do not engage in training potential enemy combatants who have no loyalty to the cause of fighting terrorism or aiding America in such. The complications posed by civil or religious strife within these countries are not primarily part of our defense strategies. While these issues are of concern, they are secondary to our mission. It is no difficult to understand why these programs are stalling because the military feels their mission is being thwarted by the training of insurgents who are not loyal to the cause. War strategies must be highly effective and not muddied by undeveloped ideas like training others to fight for us - We have known how to fight for our freedom since the America Revolution. Let our military fight for freedom without these training impediments to their existing strategies.
4
The US should have learned their lesson with Sadam Hussien. We gave him money, weapons etc. to fight Syria and look how that turned out. That money would have been better used at home. Perhaps feeding starving kids or sheltering homeless vets , or countless other more humanitarian uses.
2
Saddam fought Iran.
While we waste *billions* overseas on epic failures.....
My county is raising sales tax to 10%, raising the property tax, and asking for more bonds in the November election just to pave over some potholes and keep our poor public schools open (the school district already closed half its elementary schools).
The state university is raising tuition by >10% for the 8th year in a row after its state funding is cut for the 10th year in a row. It now receives less than half its funding from the state and relies on admitting highly unqualified foreign students just for their tuition money.
A bridge on the only freeway between Phoenix and LA collapsed and there's not enough money to build a comparable replacement after 2 months. Now the major artery will only have 2 lanes...
What's wrong with this country?
My county is raising sales tax to 10%, raising the property tax, and asking for more bonds in the November election just to pave over some potholes and keep our poor public schools open (the school district already closed half its elementary schools).
The state university is raising tuition by >10% for the 8th year in a row after its state funding is cut for the 10th year in a row. It now receives less than half its funding from the state and relies on admitting highly unqualified foreign students just for their tuition money.
A bridge on the only freeway between Phoenix and LA collapsed and there's not enough money to build a comparable replacement after 2 months. Now the major artery will only have 2 lanes...
What's wrong with this country?
158
What's wrong with this country is that the government is the call-girl of the oligarchy, and the working poor pay a disproportionate share of the maintenance fees, while the hereditary rich ride around in cars that cost more than the median annual income, or jets that cost more than the median lifetime income.
1
"What's wrong with this country?"
Our antiquated electoral system which stifles the voice of the "we people" at the benefit of domestic and foreign interest groups! That is what is wrong. It did not evolve as Windows OS evolved to be succesful.
Our antiquated electoral system which stifles the voice of the "we people" at the benefit of domestic and foreign interest groups! That is what is wrong. It did not evolve as Windows OS evolved to be succesful.
Who do you vote for? Who will you vote for next time?
"...without a political bargain to unite the country's Shiite and Sunnia Arabs..."
How often must we listen to this fantasy from the Washington policy elite? Have they not learned anything over the past years?
The Times is to be commended for this article. Hopefully many more will follow and this will become a regular beat. One observes that there has been virtually no Congressional oversight of Pentagon training and military assistance missions for the past 15 years (except to whine that Israel is not getting enough).
When the government in Washington is incompetent and ineffective, why should we expect the military overseas to be better?
How often must we listen to this fantasy from the Washington policy elite? Have they not learned anything over the past years?
The Times is to be commended for this article. Hopefully many more will follow and this will become a regular beat. One observes that there has been virtually no Congressional oversight of Pentagon training and military assistance missions for the past 15 years (except to whine that Israel is not getting enough).
When the government in Washington is incompetent and ineffective, why should we expect the military overseas to be better?
14
I fully believe Obama knew these losses were going to occur and used these defections to further arm these extremist muslims.
He is showing every sign of supporting this insurgency, not fighting it. This, certainly, is backed up by the 10's of thousands of unvetted combatant aged males from Syria now being allowed to enter the US.
He is showing every sign of supporting this insurgency, not fighting it. This, certainly, is backed up by the 10's of thousands of unvetted combatant aged males from Syria now being allowed to enter the US.
1
Unfortunately, it takes investigative journalism to expose the fact that the lone winner in our foreign exploits is the military-industrial complex, not the American taxpayer, nor the cultures where mostly ignorant pro-American operatives exist.
"Cut our losses" makes sense in such a fiasco.
From the position as a taxpayer: establishing puppet pro-American governments just compounds the errors that already are evident.
No wonder our national history includes "isolationism".
"Cut our losses" makes sense in such a fiasco.
From the position as a taxpayer: establishing puppet pro-American governments just compounds the errors that already are evident.
No wonder our national history includes "isolationism".
5
All our failings to mollify the eternal war between Sunni and Shia Islam stems from the fundamental bigotry and contempt of our government and military for them when they first decided to deceive us about why it was necessary in the first place.
The only reason that makes any sense at all, was to allow contractors to rob the treasury blind and leave nothing for domestic programs. All the so-called infrastucture built in Iraq and Afghanistan was less than substandard at outrageous prices and no one was ever held accountable. How are they supposed to be grateful for useless buildings and uncounted dead? It only confirms their worst suspicion of our motives.
Once again, the only ones who benefited are the banksters.
The only reason that makes any sense at all, was to allow contractors to rob the treasury blind and leave nothing for domestic programs. All the so-called infrastucture built in Iraq and Afghanistan was less than substandard at outrageous prices and no one was ever held accountable. How are they supposed to be grateful for useless buildings and uncounted dead? It only confirms their worst suspicion of our motives.
Once again, the only ones who benefited are the banksters.
4
to fight you need to know "how" and "what for". American training may provide the "how," but will never be able to provide the "what for".
But I do not expect these programs will be closed: the contractors get paid, the Pentagon asks Congress for more money -- and gets it.
Failure never stopped an expensive military program from prospering.
But I do not expect these programs will be closed: the contractors get paid, the Pentagon asks Congress for more money -- and gets it.
Failure never stopped an expensive military program from prospering.
6
You cant pour a quart into a pint jar. All the money and resources and troops cant counteract the lack of will resulting from factious rivalries and shifting alliances. That was the lesson of Vietnam and applies to this situation. The reason that Bush 41 was successful in 1990 Kuwaiti operation was the unified motivation of purpose which was to drive out the Iraqi forces and not get involved in the murkier aspects of Iraqi politics by invading their country. Let Iran and Russia pour all their resources into this conflict and sit back and watch them implode from the futility.
4
A lot of corruption from insiders ( U.S. government officials and American contractors ) who stole most of that money. I remember reading NY Times news about missing pallets of fresh off the printing press hundred dollar bills flown to Iraq by the plane loads. Why the U. S government does not want to tell the American people the names of those criminals who stole those money?
8
There is a well-established concept that explains all of this which I wish your reporter had discussed, i.e. "the limits to military power." Seymour Melman, Gabriel Kolko, and Andrew Bacevich all addressed the problem. The other point is that just using hard power by itself is often not very useful. Notice why the South Korea case works and the South Vietnam case does not? One was a real country and the other an artificial creation.
4
We are indeed over the proverbial barrel. Much of the issue is cultural. Loyalties in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan tend to be local, religious, and tribal rather than to the nation state. Additionally, the latter has tended to weak and corrupt. Different sub-groups will fight side-by-side against a common threat ("the enemy of my enemy is my friend"), but as the threat shifts, so too do the loyalties. So, a group perceived as "good guys" in Syria 2 years ago because they were willing to fight against Assad might just turn out to be the "bad guys" once he is gone and a struggle for new leadership begins.
It is tempting to call for the USA to stay out of it, stop wasting money, tend to issues on the home front, and to maintain a defensive posture responding only to our national interests and security. Yet, can we really turn out backs as ISIS overruns large swaths of the Middle East and North Africa? Do we allow Iran to move at will to support fighters in Iraq and Afghanistan? What do we do when these various groups who are inclined to carry out terror attacks have gained weapons, territory, and thousands more members? In short, do we fight them when they are more contained and smaller in number or wait until they are larger and pose an actual threat to us and our allies?
I am far from a hawk; opposed the war in Iraq; and do not believe in American exceptionalism. Still, I think we pull our heads into the shell of national interest and defense to our peril.
It is tempting to call for the USA to stay out of it, stop wasting money, tend to issues on the home front, and to maintain a defensive posture responding only to our national interests and security. Yet, can we really turn out backs as ISIS overruns large swaths of the Middle East and North Africa? Do we allow Iran to move at will to support fighters in Iraq and Afghanistan? What do we do when these various groups who are inclined to carry out terror attacks have gained weapons, territory, and thousands more members? In short, do we fight them when they are more contained and smaller in number or wait until they are larger and pose an actual threat to us and our allies?
I am far from a hawk; opposed the war in Iraq; and do not believe in American exceptionalism. Still, I think we pull our heads into the shell of national interest and defense to our peril.
5
Do you expect Americans to be willing to have OUR children die for tribal people who send their own young fighting men out of their culture to ours in Europe so they don't risk dying??
Enough is enough. After 15 years our experts think maybe trying to train armies in the middle eastern areas (not nations!) isn't working.
For pete's sake how stupid can these experts be? Or the better question is how much did Our taxes pay for this 'expertise' so the wonder boys in our government (yes mccain and graham and the rest of you elderly war mongers),academia, 'think tanks' and consultancies could ensure the cash pipeline tofriends and foes alike.
Enough is enough. After 15 years our experts think maybe trying to train armies in the middle eastern areas (not nations!) isn't working.
For pete's sake how stupid can these experts be? Or the better question is how much did Our taxes pay for this 'expertise' so the wonder boys in our government (yes mccain and graham and the rest of you elderly war mongers),academia, 'think tanks' and consultancies could ensure the cash pipeline tofriends and foes alike.
2
Thomas Friedman got it right. We only have two options. Either a multi-generational effort to fix these massively broken societies, or a retreat behind our own walls, sealing them up.
Neither alternative is attractive. But we need to decide.
We have been slow to realize that indeed the barbarians are at the gate. Literally.
Neither alternative is attractive. But we need to decide.
We have been slow to realize that indeed the barbarians are at the gate. Literally.
2
Indeed, the subject article may wake up the conscience of the
the Lords of war in Afghan, Iraq & Syria. What is the outcome ?
Loss of many innocent lives in the name of terrorism, religion, power game, consumption of many outdated arms and weapons in the magazines of the involved nations, Opening R&D in the new areas of ordnance and equating every thing against economic development. I request the elite team of NYT to come out with an analysis on the impact of these three wars on the economy of the subject countries and NATO. This may help the successor to President Obama to think twice before declare war on any country.
Words for peace has largely been erased by the wars in the middle east. Key facts are,
1) Who had created Talban? We two ( USA& Pakistan)- Gen. Musharaf's Q&A to Mr.George Bush.
2) Did Mr.Bush could find "the weapons for mass destruction " in
Iraq by killing Mr.Sadam Hussain and restoring peace by handing over the power to the pro-NATO Govt?- NIL.
3)Do Russia and the USA use Syria to test their military might ?
- largely, yes.
The history of the USA starting from Mr. Bill Clinton proves that the presidents of Democratic party have preferred " think and act " before declaring war but the republican presidents,both Bush have preferred " act with arms " and left the burden to the
successors.
No doubt, Mr. Obama did and doing his best. If there is a room in the American constitution, Mr.Obama is the best bet for the presidential candidate for third term.
the Lords of war in Afghan, Iraq & Syria. What is the outcome ?
Loss of many innocent lives in the name of terrorism, religion, power game, consumption of many outdated arms and weapons in the magazines of the involved nations, Opening R&D in the new areas of ordnance and equating every thing against economic development. I request the elite team of NYT to come out with an analysis on the impact of these three wars on the economy of the subject countries and NATO. This may help the successor to President Obama to think twice before declare war on any country.
Words for peace has largely been erased by the wars in the middle east. Key facts are,
1) Who had created Talban? We two ( USA& Pakistan)- Gen. Musharaf's Q&A to Mr.George Bush.
2) Did Mr.Bush could find "the weapons for mass destruction " in
Iraq by killing Mr.Sadam Hussain and restoring peace by handing over the power to the pro-NATO Govt?- NIL.
3)Do Russia and the USA use Syria to test their military might ?
- largely, yes.
The history of the USA starting from Mr. Bill Clinton proves that the presidents of Democratic party have preferred " think and act " before declaring war but the republican presidents,both Bush have preferred " act with arms " and left the burden to the
successors.
No doubt, Mr. Obama did and doing his best. If there is a room in the American constitution, Mr.Obama is the best bet for the presidential candidate for third term.
5
Actually, it's in the interest of the military contractors that these billion dollar hand-outs do NOTHING to improve the effectiveness of these foreign fighters. If their effectiveness improved there would be no more reason for these handouts to exist and their companies would be reduced to penny-stocks. These wars are a gigantic scam orchestrated by the military industrial complex, together with the connivance of the US Military and Department of Defense, to rob the American people blind,
171
"interest of the military contractors"
I wonder how much money they spend in lobbying our congress and our government!
I wonder how much money they spend in lobbying our congress and our government!
When we pay soldiers to be recruited and trained, we are relying that the individual being trained has affinity for the country they are being trained to protect, and that they love their country.
In the three cases you mentioned, I do agree that the officers are not trained to fight most of them work as officers to collect a very good paycheck and the benefit of being an officer. All three situations require them to fight internally with possibly people of the same clan or/and same religion.
If we see the training of Indian and Pakistani soldiers and officers, it is quite effective because they are trained to fight each other right in the same theater of war. The training imparted to the Afghans were to fight other Afghans, it is very difficult to fight ones brother and the same is true in Iraq and Yemen. In Iraq in order to gain traction we have even used the sectarian narrative which essentially has made the situation worse and the same is being done in Yemen. Houthis like Taliban are natives of the country. They will be still there after the Foreigners leave their country in whatever shape and condition it is.
Spending Billions of Dollars on them has been our choice; we thought we could buy them to fight each other, but it looks as if we were mistaken. It is time to cut our losses and come home.
We are making the same mistake in Yemen, Saudis bombed a wedding party, killed over 130 mostly women and children and the Saudi FM is blaming us for the targeting info.
In the three cases you mentioned, I do agree that the officers are not trained to fight most of them work as officers to collect a very good paycheck and the benefit of being an officer. All three situations require them to fight internally with possibly people of the same clan or/and same religion.
If we see the training of Indian and Pakistani soldiers and officers, it is quite effective because they are trained to fight each other right in the same theater of war. The training imparted to the Afghans were to fight other Afghans, it is very difficult to fight ones brother and the same is true in Iraq and Yemen. In Iraq in order to gain traction we have even used the sectarian narrative which essentially has made the situation worse and the same is being done in Yemen. Houthis like Taliban are natives of the country. They will be still there after the Foreigners leave their country in whatever shape and condition it is.
Spending Billions of Dollars on them has been our choice; we thought we could buy them to fight each other, but it looks as if we were mistaken. It is time to cut our losses and come home.
We are making the same mistake in Yemen, Saudis bombed a wedding party, killed over 130 mostly women and children and the Saudi FM is blaming us for the targeting info.
88
Of all the troops that have been trained and supported by the US, it is only the valiant Kurdish forces, whose bravery and successes have been lauded world wide, can the US really count on, yet because of some agreement with Baghdad, very little in the way of supplies and equipment gets through to them, but they do get some from other countries like Germany, but not enough. In addition, they now have to contend with virulent antagonism of Turkey's President Erdogan, who is relentlessly bombing the PKK because of their national aspirations for a united, independent country, a difficult prospect because it extends into the territories of Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria - one of the legacies of WW1 and a blight on the powers that created this mess.
Given that training most troops to fight successfully has failed miserably and bombing from the sky has achieved only moderate results in decimating ISIS, it would seem there is only one option left, and that is to send individual, highly trained snipers and marksmen wearing undercover bullet-proof vests into Raqqa, Ramadi, Mosul (Iraq) and Palmyra (Syria), to randomly shoot and kill virtually anyone carrying a rifle, be it male or female, then quickly recover their weapons and ammunition and later distribute them to willing and capable citizens of those cities - with some basic training in how to operate and maintain their newly acquired weapons - in order to slowly but surely reduce the ranks of these barbarous terrorists.
Given that training most troops to fight successfully has failed miserably and bombing from the sky has achieved only moderate results in decimating ISIS, it would seem there is only one option left, and that is to send individual, highly trained snipers and marksmen wearing undercover bullet-proof vests into Raqqa, Ramadi, Mosul (Iraq) and Palmyra (Syria), to randomly shoot and kill virtually anyone carrying a rifle, be it male or female, then quickly recover their weapons and ammunition and later distribute them to willing and capable citizens of those cities - with some basic training in how to operate and maintain their newly acquired weapons - in order to slowly but surely reduce the ranks of these barbarous terrorists.
2
I am inclined to agree with everyone below who cites all the good money after bad that the military-industrial complex, especially since 9/11, has demanded and received, putting billions or trillions into the hands of contractors who make out like bandits.But there is a larger question: is the United States an exceptional nation and are we responsible for creating and maintaining order around the globe. Neo-conservative foreign policy argues superficially that it we fight over there we won't have to fight over here. This is utter nonsense. War in Iraq and Afganistan de-stabilized these countries even more than when they were ruled by the Taliban or by Saddam Hussein. But we have on a higher level justified these useless wars because we assert that the US is an an exceptional, nay, providential nation whose responsibility since the end of the Cold War is total, even as we confront relative economic decline and all kinds of political, social, cultural and political-economic problems and divisions. The real problem and one that can lend itself to a real grand strategy rather than short-term pragmatism is to conceive a clear vision of a lesser role in the world or one which accepts both cooperation with competition among the great powers (G-20) or (G-8) or whatever and collectively either deals with failed states or walks away except in cases where national security is truly threatened. Easier said then done.
43
Was This story written in 1950? Our Koreans could not fight their Koreans. Our Viets could not fight their Viets.either. Our Cubans lost to theirs, our Niquragans lost too, Our Iraqis are awfull, Our Afgans are a joke.
Suggested course at Military Academies
"Foreigners Will Not Fight Under American Flag" 2ndCourse "Why you should expect them not to"
Suggested course at Military Academies
"Foreigners Will Not Fight Under American Flag" 2ndCourse "Why you should expect them not to"
152
What about our Syrians bombed by the Russians?
3rd course: Because the super-entrenched military industrial complex (aka Wall Street and the plutocrats) wants you to keep repeating the same policies.
4th course: Disguise your gun barrel with "we're here to bring you democracy, freedom, human rights etc." and you'll be welcomed as liberators.
4th course: Disguise your gun barrel with "we're here to bring you democracy, freedom, human rights etc." and you'll be welcomed as liberators.
If people will not fight for their own country, why should we fight for them?
Mark Thomason speaks well to the point: we continually fail when it comes to developing wise strategy. We can teach how to win a battle, but we have no idea of how to win the war, always seems far beyond our imagination. Happens over and over again.
Maybe even on tactics, we go wide of the mark. The BBC this morning had an inquiry of drone policy: it seems it makes sense in the short-term, but fails in the long-term. That may be America's greatest cultural blindspot - no long-term thinking, all short-term tactics.
In the case of Afghan forces, thousands of 'government' men trained by Americans can be routed by a few hundred Taliban - seems like a perfect experiment: take a group of Afghans, divide them into two groups, train one under American assumptions of strategy and tactics, train the other in Taliban strategy and tactics, observe which one is more effective. Surprised at the outcome?
Vietnam has been thoroughly dissected, and now we have Afghanistan and Iraq to work over, trying to understand where we went wrong. We win so many battles, and then lose the war.
Having lived overseas many years, feeling that i've learned to see three sides of every cultural issue, still perennially pulled-up short by realisation that i still have blind spots, where i lack understanding of what motivates people. Sure, we all laugh and cry, or fight or not, but what makes us do that? - it is not always what you assume. Seems the US makes false assumptions over and over.
Maybe even on tactics, we go wide of the mark. The BBC this morning had an inquiry of drone policy: it seems it makes sense in the short-term, but fails in the long-term. That may be America's greatest cultural blindspot - no long-term thinking, all short-term tactics.
In the case of Afghan forces, thousands of 'government' men trained by Americans can be routed by a few hundred Taliban - seems like a perfect experiment: take a group of Afghans, divide them into two groups, train one under American assumptions of strategy and tactics, train the other in Taliban strategy and tactics, observe which one is more effective. Surprised at the outcome?
Vietnam has been thoroughly dissected, and now we have Afghanistan and Iraq to work over, trying to understand where we went wrong. We win so many battles, and then lose the war.
Having lived overseas many years, feeling that i've learned to see three sides of every cultural issue, still perennially pulled-up short by realisation that i still have blind spots, where i lack understanding of what motivates people. Sure, we all laugh and cry, or fight or not, but what makes us do that? - it is not always what you assume. Seems the US makes false assumptions over and over.
17
While we waste billions in the Middle East, not a soul inside the beltway seems to care. Republicans and Democrats alike appear happy to sit idly by while these insane, unwinnable wars bleed us dry. There are many reasons to believe that our system is horribly broken, but here is evidence of just how seriously broken it really is. Shame on the Congress for doing nothing and shame on us for providing them with the license they need to keep doing it.
499
But, but, but... didn't you get that memo?
This is all in the name of "national security." How can anyone possibly object?
[That's SARCASM]
This is all in the name of "national security." How can anyone possibly object?
[That's SARCASM]
1
In about 13 months from now, they will win 97-98% of the vote. Obviously we Voting Americans DO APPROVE of what they are doing. Overwhemingly
1
I don't know how the finances ultimately shake out, but somebody must be making money on the gear.
If it doesn't work throw another five billion at the problem.
That will fix it and get me that vice presidency at a defense contractors shop for my second career.
I have better suggestion. Give me five million and I will arm the local deer,bunnies, and groundhogs to build an effective militia to fight overseas.
It won't work but there will be almost five billion in the till.
That will fix it and get me that vice presidency at a defense contractors shop for my second career.
I have better suggestion. Give me five million and I will arm the local deer,bunnies, and groundhogs to build an effective militia to fight overseas.
It won't work but there will be almost five billion in the till.
5
The US foreign military training programs in many countries have collapsed. American military and counter-terrorism officials seem to know the reasons. The core reasons seem to be be political and they effect the lack of leadership, will and morale at local troop level in the individual countries in which these programs fail.
Unfortunately, there does not seem to be any US success at the political level either.
"We need to develop a strategy," Mr. Obama said, "that expands our reach without sending forces that stretch our military too thin or stir up local resentments. We need partners to fight terrorists alongside us". The Obama administration has already admitted to a lack of any strategy in places like Syria, unless waiting and rhetoric counts as strategy, and its strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan does not seem to be any more successful.
"Clearly there is no progress", is an understatement.
Massive failure of Mr. Obama's policy would be a more apt description.
Unfortunately, there does not seem to be any US success at the political level either.
"We need to develop a strategy," Mr. Obama said, "that expands our reach without sending forces that stretch our military too thin or stir up local resentments. We need partners to fight terrorists alongside us". The Obama administration has already admitted to a lack of any strategy in places like Syria, unless waiting and rhetoric counts as strategy, and its strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan does not seem to be any more successful.
"Clearly there is no progress", is an understatement.
Massive failure of Mr. Obama's policy would be a more apt description.
10
Then go with Bibi and find yourself and Israel in the worst political condition in it's entire history. You don't understand why and can only say that the world is crazy. Isn't that the definition of insanity? "I'm not crazy, the world is." The extreme right wing in Israel is the most dangerous element in the survival of Israel.
And, this is said by a Jew who has lost immediate family members to the Holocaust.
And, this is said by a Jew who has lost immediate family members to the Holocaust.
2
It's glib to blame Obama. There is a history stretching back to LBJ of massive military failure. In fact, we have not won a war since WWII.
Perhaps, just perhaps, we should revisit our base assumptions, given these results?
Perhaps, just perhaps, we should revisit our base assumptions, given these results?
3
To Jack
No, I am only saying that Mr. Obama's policy in Syria and Iraq and Afghanistan is bankrupt and a failure.
It has nothing to do with Mr. Netanyahu, for whom I did not vote.
Your family Holocaust is irrelevant re current US policy in Syria et al.
No, I am only saying that Mr. Obama's policy in Syria and Iraq and Afghanistan is bankrupt and a failure.
It has nothing to do with Mr. Netanyahu, for whom I did not vote.
Your family Holocaust is irrelevant re current US policy in Syria et al.
2
Guess we didn't learn from Vietnam. Learn from the past or be prepared to repeat again and again. Leave the Middle East to the locals. We don't need the oil anymore.
15
$500M to train 4-5? Obama outdoes Dubya.
Forget terrorism or oil, Iraq was a masterly NeoCon coup outdoing Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover, till then history’s most corrupt, Teapot Dome et al, oligarchy that set up SOCAL and gave Saudis others' oil.
1920s and 2000s massive moves of $$$ from poor to rich led to financial meltdown. Then Europe's suicide saved us. Today, Asian conflict chances slim as India/China are in no mood to slug out.
Ever since Lincoln each generation of his Party climbs to a higher levels of deceit, Eisenhower MIC warnings a rare exception. Reagan revived the corruption culture, and Dubya attained zenith. For NeoCons 9/11 was a godsend. Rag-tag Taliban and toothless Saddam needed a battalion at most, Iraq conceived to channel tax-payers' money to the pockets of MIC. With Saddam done, NeoCons asked for $672 Billion as first tranche for war/re-construction, encore many times over, contracts un-tendered to cronies (Haliburton, Blackwater) who sold off-the-shelf $8,000 computer systems for $38,000,000 back to Uncle Sam.
IRS was kept at bay of its share in the obscene loot with HQ moves from Chicago to tax-free Dubai. In 8 years of Dubya some $15 Trillion went from ordinary Americans to NeoCons, all of it waving the flag!!! Iraq will recover, but will we? Decimated middle class, hollowed manufacturing and Wal-Mart greeter jobs that barely allow people to survive let alone have a family. Slavery is back, white and black - equal opportunity at its best.
Forget terrorism or oil, Iraq was a masterly NeoCon coup outdoing Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover, till then history’s most corrupt, Teapot Dome et al, oligarchy that set up SOCAL and gave Saudis others' oil.
1920s and 2000s massive moves of $$$ from poor to rich led to financial meltdown. Then Europe's suicide saved us. Today, Asian conflict chances slim as India/China are in no mood to slug out.
Ever since Lincoln each generation of his Party climbs to a higher levels of deceit, Eisenhower MIC warnings a rare exception. Reagan revived the corruption culture, and Dubya attained zenith. For NeoCons 9/11 was a godsend. Rag-tag Taliban and toothless Saddam needed a battalion at most, Iraq conceived to channel tax-payers' money to the pockets of MIC. With Saddam done, NeoCons asked for $672 Billion as first tranche for war/re-construction, encore many times over, contracts un-tendered to cronies (Haliburton, Blackwater) who sold off-the-shelf $8,000 computer systems for $38,000,000 back to Uncle Sam.
IRS was kept at bay of its share in the obscene loot with HQ moves from Chicago to tax-free Dubai. In 8 years of Dubya some $15 Trillion went from ordinary Americans to NeoCons, all of it waving the flag!!! Iraq will recover, but will we? Decimated middle class, hollowed manufacturing and Wal-Mart greeter jobs that barely allow people to survive let alone have a family. Slavery is back, white and black - equal opportunity at its best.
53
Perhaps the EPA should check for contaminants in the air and water supplies within the beltway. Anecdotally, there seems to be a lucidity crisis of many years duration.
7
Why don't we just give the money directly to the Taliban and Isis, and cut out the US middleman? Give each of them a monthly stipend, which will continue as long as they don't attack. I'm sure it'd be just as effective, and probably cheaper. The graft we're wasting could go into the reporting system. Nobody gets hurt.
9
Strategic success is dependent adapting our mission tio the needs if tge local cultures This is nothing new. For thousands of years, civilized nations have sought to recruit local foreign forces to provide forward defense. What is new and different is that in the post colonial era, we are trying to create national institutions instead of using already existing tribal units. Without the presence of an overarching super force dominating the tribal cultures prevalent in the middle East, this strategy has a low likelihood of success. Until the local organizations are strong enough culturally to survive, it will be necessary for us to provide a supervisory stabilising force.
1
In the countries which the U.S. supports, the leaders of those countries regularly abuse and murder their own citizens, in OUR name, and the military commanders even steal the wages of the soldiers whose salaries we are supposed to be paying.
All U.S. politicians, Democrat and Republican, know this.
But almost no one on either side of the aisle cares.
All U.S. politicians, Democrat and Republican, know this.
But almost no one on either side of the aisle cares.
7
Tens of billions of dollars, which, if spent in the USA, would have repaired roads, bridges and tunnels, built schools and more.
Instead we made companies like Halliburton rich, and a mess across the world.
Instead we made companies like Halliburton rich, and a mess across the world.
339
I agree. I suppose Halliburton could transition to the construction and repair of American infrastructure. And General Dynamics could start building trains instead of submarines. But then it would appear that government, in partnership with the private sector, could actually accomplish things - and that is exactly the message the GOP is loath to send to the American people. Better to make those companies rich for blowing things up in distant lands where no one notices.
1
And all accomplished by our precious Democracy. Next year will bring more hair of the dog.
Exactly we have places Appalachia in the USA where people live in third world, many people have to use outhouses, because they don't have plumbing, that need to be built up.
In addition the acute homeless problem in many American cities, not the least Washington DC. The amount of homeless just blocks from the U.S. Capitol building is appalling.
In addition the acute homeless problem in many American cities, not the least Washington DC. The amount of homeless just blocks from the U.S. Capitol building is appalling.
1
The US is wasting its money. I can't believe the US spent $500 million to train a handful of rebels to fight ISIS. This administration is very naive. President Obama does not understand that corruption and dishonesty are rampant overseas.
Mr. President, could you please mail me a big check? I'll be much cheaper than $500 million (I'll take $100 million). I am a nice person. I dislike terrorism. I promise to cheer on the United States.
Mr. President, could you please mail me a big check? I'll be much cheaper than $500 million (I'll take $100 million). I am a nice person. I dislike terrorism. I promise to cheer on the United States.
29
"The US is wasting its money. "
And her chilren!
And her chilren!
So nor kid yourself about corruption. It is rampant here among the one per cent. Laws and morals are for the rest of us.
Shows you how much Obama knows about leadership
14
I suppose you supported George W. Bush, the president who:
1) Let us be attacked on 9-11
2) Invaded Afghanistan and couldn't get bin Laden
3) Invaded Iraq on false pretexts and lies
4) Allowed thousands to die after Hurricane Katrina
5) Caused the Great Recession of 2008
Trump 2016 is your motto, right?
What's not to like about a candidate worth $10 billion and who had three draft deferments?
1) Let us be attacked on 9-11
2) Invaded Afghanistan and couldn't get bin Laden
3) Invaded Iraq on false pretexts and lies
4) Allowed thousands to die after Hurricane Katrina
5) Caused the Great Recession of 2008
Trump 2016 is your motto, right?
What's not to like about a candidate worth $10 billion and who had three draft deferments?
62
To Jon,
How many years has it been? When will it start being Mr. Obama's fault and failure?
Or does Mr. Obama receive a pass forever?
How many years has it been? When will it start being Mr. Obama's fault and failure?
Or does Mr. Obama receive a pass forever?
16
Finger pointing and fault finding are irrelevant distractions when presented without credible alternative policies.
No one is currently presenting such policies, no one.
That's most likely because no such policies exist.
Permanent change of the chaotic, violent ME is simply beyond the capability of the US government and its allies.
No one is currently presenting such policies, no one.
That's most likely because no such policies exist.
Permanent change of the chaotic, violent ME is simply beyond the capability of the US government and its allies.
10
Why wouldn't an Iraq or Afghan young man make out as if he wanted to be trained as a soldier? They are all unemployed. Some money is better than nothing. After all this time and treasure spent in these countries my question would be how can these US Generals be so incompetent? Imagine for a moment what the US would be like if instead of letting the US army play war games that the $2-3 trillion spent would have been spent on US infrastructure.
72
Why would you think that someone would fight for the devil, just because you paid him? Or, more correctly, why would you expect the money paid to prostitutes would buy you love? We removed the governments that were there and allowed chaos to destroy much that was left of the lives of Afghans, Iraqis, etc., and now you expect the people to support your puppets?
This isn't a real story to anyone who pays attention. Money don't buy you love, or respect, or sincerity, or integrity, or anything - least of all, loyalty.
This isn't a real story to anyone who pays attention. Money don't buy you love, or respect, or sincerity, or integrity, or anything - least of all, loyalty.
198
Lessons of history - Democracy cannot be forced down the throats of people who cannot understand or recognize the need for it on their own. The cost to us in billions of dollars and lives of our brave soldiers (commissioned to accomplish this impossible task) is mind numbing but we continue to bash our heads against "this wall" expecting a different outcome. As the old song goes "When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn...."
189
It was not democracy we tried to force down their throats.
7
Democracy, by it's very definition, is government by the coolest guy. The hot stud, who can sway you, is the leader in a democracy. Demos, people; kratos, government. The people end up electing the coolest guy, not the smart one or the one who will get you out of the hole, just the one that sounds cooler.
There has to be another way.
There has to be another way.
2
"Democracy, by it's very definition, is government by the coolest guy. The hot stud, who can sway you"
Nixon?
Carter?
Either Bush?
Cameron?
Abbot?
There are a lot of democratic winners who are NOT cool guys, not studs.
Whoever wins this next election won't be either. Sanders? Hillary? Trump? Bush again? Anybody at all a stud?
Nixon?
Carter?
Either Bush?
Cameron?
Abbot?
There are a lot of democratic winners who are NOT cool guys, not studs.
Whoever wins this next election won't be either. Sanders? Hillary? Trump? Bush again? Anybody at all a stud?
Does anyone here remember the massive military aid program in South Vietnam in the 1960s? And by the way, how did South Korea's forces do against North Korea's in 1950?
9
Not well at first.Same with the South Vietnamese Army who except for elite units never got going. This is generally the case. Elite units do well there are just not enough of them.
1
The US has had this problem from the beginning of the MAAG program. In the cold war era we built up armies to counterbalance the communist threat.Often these armies pulled off coups or we supported them in government to keep out the communists. Others collapsed like the ARVN.One of the big problems was to use contractors to do the training. Particularly post cold war
1
Our problem with military assistance is we do not do it well, we are not serious about it and we use contractors who are not up to the job to save money. Our allies,particularly the the European ones, are better probably because of their colonial experience. You can not get people to fight who do not want to so we take over with poor results.Having Americans embedded only goes so far. Having American troops to stabilize has limits.We just do not have the staying power to do the job right.If we had kept the Iraqi army and worked with it we would have been better off.If we keep a Syrian army and worked wiih it we would be better off. But it takes a lot of work,costs money and needs sustainability . We just do not have the patience and commitment.
7
Our much bigger problem is thinking that we can make better decisions for foreigners than they can for themselves. The delusion of American "exceptionalism" makes us unable to realize that It doesn't matter how well we train them. They don't want to simply be pawns in our game.
11
Obama's naive thoughts that pulling out of Iraq and let our prior investments take its course was a mistake. We left billions of equipment for the enemy to take over. Putin doesn't respect Obama and he is coming on strong as the world leader. Obama is NOT a world leader so time for him to get out, not soon enough. He doesn't like war? Well war is all around us whether we are there or not. Pretty soon war will be here.
This is how all empires ultimately fail.
The United States operates 662 overseas bases in 38 foreign countries. It is very hard to imagine how this serves our national interests and rather easy to suspect that instead it serves 'special' interests.
We are somewhere in the middle of a long period of economic turmoil brought on by globalization and automation and the money we are wasting on "strategic" outposts around the globe is very much needed at home.
Excellent article.
The United States operates 662 overseas bases in 38 foreign countries. It is very hard to imagine how this serves our national interests and rather easy to suspect that instead it serves 'special' interests.
We are somewhere in the middle of a long period of economic turmoil brought on by globalization and automation and the money we are wasting on "strategic" outposts around the globe is very much needed at home.
Excellent article.
564
Excellent comment.
Good comment. The US has gone from it's birth as a young country wary of foreign entanglements to gingerly treading in other countries to assuming that it has the right and obligation to do so to maintain its status. As if the world is a giant NFL and we want every Superbowl, and there's so much money to be earned - at the expense of every other public service - it is a rare pol who stands up to the pressure - and the ensuing accusations of being unpatriotic.
1
Indeed, all true. Which invites the big question: will Americans ever gain true democratic control of America? More to the point, will Americans ever see direct benefits from the majority of the taxes they pay? Or will we continue to watch our public education systems languish, our health care systems devour more of our GDP, our cities' infrastructures turn to ruins while we spend hundreds of billions protecting special interests' investments around the world? How can we ever get control?
1
When Obama told the world"no more boots on the ground" , he should have said " I refuse to fight in a serious manner." It would have clarified things for the media to some degree, sort of. You can stop making excuses for him at any time.
4
I really do not think there is any excuse for Obama.
6
Trump 2016, right?
What's your excuse, Mr. Shyres?
What's your excuse, Mr. Shyres?
Obama does not need excuses. He recognizes, as many do not, that the American people are simply not willing to sacrifice more blood and treasure in the Middle East.
7
'It is not working' as the President intended, correct. In that regard it is a colossal failure. But it is working well for our supposed allies in arming and training militias to prop up their own regimes and suppress internal political enemies.
6
This includes: Don't waste billions of hard-earned wealth taken from the middle class and corporations and the rich on people whose concept of freedom means forcing women to wear veils, stoning adulterers to death, and killing women because of "honor".