It's not that we don't care. In reality, the American people were never asked. A handful of people at the top, the powers behind the centrifuge, the hidden money electors make the decisions...in Vietnam, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in all of the wars since WW 2.
So, we invade Afghanistan as the latest example and we have been there for nearly 15 years, using trillions of dollars that should have been used for universal healthcare, education, and infrastructure in the American homeland. The Afghanis want us out of there. They never wanted there in the first place. The American people want us out.
So who benefits?
The multinational corporations, the powers behind the presidential puppets who supposedly have been elected to represent us. A democracy? The Republcans? It's all a sham. They know it and we know it. And yet, it goes on and on and on. To say that America is on the decline is an understatement.
It's simple...leave Afghanistan, Iraq, the Middle East and focus on improving the lives of American citizens where our tax money belongs: universal healthcare, child care, education, infrastructure, and the homeless, among others. We are so much better than this eternal quest for power, greed, and money. Trump is just one of the symptoms of a broken country.
16
This article is silly, and why Mr. Douthat might want to think about moving to some other place to write opinion pieces. Because I think the HVAC system may be affecting him. To cut to the chase. nobody is getting lied to here on Afghanistan, because nobody thought that the U.S. was going to "win" in Afghanistan. Nobody. Contra Vietnam, where we were in the process of producing a very successful South Korea and Taiwan, thanks to our protection,. And by that time had already "produced" a very successful Japan. (Actually they had done that on their own earlier, until they succumbed to the madness of fascism, a European import.) In short, the comparison is completely inapposite. The reason for staying in Afghanistan in some way or other was to stop it from once again being a place where global Jihadis could get trained. The idea behind Iraq, I think, though it was never articulated, was to say that the Arab Muslims had to be normal and get along with the rest of the world like other major cultures. This was not stupid. In fact, it was completely necessary.
5
Contrary to your tagline, I believe lots of Americans care about the Afghanistan lies. It's just that we are not surprised by this report; we always knew they were lies.
7
Maybe learning to live with endless wars have taken us to the point where America can live with a wholesale criminal enterprise that deceives and distorts what's left of democracy.
This is not a brand new rodeo, everything we are enduring happened to Rome and it's demise, maybe we're next. Hubris and karma have a price.
4
Since 9/11 we have been essentially a fascist nation. Any push back on the militarization of us is characterized as traitorous. Even the dems now are hawks. We are a nation that likes to kill things. We also think oil is worth killing for.
We have a fascist president and we are endlessly at war. At some point the myth that the people of the US are good people has to be questioned. They keep putting fascist in power.
11
How is it possible this editorial fails to name George Bush and his team of ideologues as the proto authors of the deceptive campaign for public support of the war in Afghanistan?
13
Wars in Islamic countries need participation by a broad coalition of civilized nations. The war in Afghanistan is extremely important for humanity as without USA and others in it, millions of women will be forced to live like slaves, hundreds of thousands of Mullah Omar and Abu Bakr Baghdadi (though the latter was an Iraqi) like figures will be bred, creating an existential threat for the civilized world.
2
Bush lied to the American public and our servicemen and women paid the dear price. Typical Republicans.
4
Plato wrote something to the effect that 'All wars are fought for the sake of getting money.' An update on that might be It's the military-industrial complex stupid!' You don't have to look too far to see who benefits the most from perpetual war: the folks who sell the weapons for one; the pork-oriented Congressfolks, who get funds covered in blood to their districts to stay reelected.
5
Keep focused Ross. Impeachment baby!!~!
Dear lovely AMERICA.... Why did you spend 35 bill in Pakistan... Why not be with the Afghanistan.. Train them equip them.... Fight with the Taliban with them.. Instead of Pakistan
1
Our "volunteer" army is, in reality, employment of last resort for people whose local economies have been devastated by globalization; a career in the military is often their best, if not only, bet. By design, their actions remain largely invisible to the majority of the American public, who would be astonished as to how many operations are carried out all over the globe, supposedly in our name. Just as in any multinational corporation, right and wrong has been subverted, but instead of the bottom line, career advancement is the impetus. With the knowledge that Congress will continue to provide funding, anything that prolongs, or promotes a war is always welcomed by a bloated military establishment filled with ambitious men and women. The fact that so many of our bases reside in Southern states, and are often the main economic driver of the local economy keeps the machine in motion.
9
I was a teen when the Pentagon papers were published in this newspaper. I'm old now that the military still does this. We haven't been attacked by another country since Pearl Harbor, though we were attacked by terrorists in a huge way 18 years ago. But we've fought in wars that killed millions of people (plus those killed by sanctions) in my lifetime, and tens of thousands of American soldiers. You write that in the future nobody will be paying attention anymore. Not many seem to be paying attention now. It's discouraging to even think about being an antiwar activist in such a nation after a half century of such a history.
7
The author left out one significant difference between Afghanistan and Vietnam:
- 3000 American civilians died on 911, whereas the Vietcong did not provide a mortal threat to civilian America....
Could it not be the case that the American public will tolerate American involvement in an Afghanistan-type conflict given the threat, perceived or real, to domestic America?
2
The IMF recently reported that in 2015 the fossil fuel industry in America received $649 BILLION dollars in government subsidies, that was even more than the Pentagon that received $599 BILLION that same year. This year the Pentagon has received $760 BILLION yet, we do not know what subsidies the fossil fuel industry has received( and I am not sure if Americans want to know|).
A TRILLION wasted in Afghanistan and who knows how much more in Iraq, Somalia, Libya etc. etc.
Of course, despite all this, the "elites" and those in power continue to claim that the country cannot afford Medicare For All, expunging student debt and free public college as progressives have proposed. When does it all stop and when are Americans finally going to take to the streets and chant, "enough is enough you can't have it all"!
10
Mr. Douthat's generation skipping argument conveniently passes over two war hungry Republican regimes -- Reagan's and W's. Reagan's lies and deceits came in the form of shadow wars in Central America and illegal deals with Iran and the Contra's, not to mention support for the cavalcade of dictators to the south. W, Rumsfeld, Cheney and Condi did their best to lie and betray as well (WMDs, the famous orchestrated pulling down of the statue). But never mind. For Mr. Douthat we leap from Vietnam to Obama. It is true that both Republicans and Democrats live off war, but Republicans are especially bad. So bad that even Mr. Douthat can't send them down the memory hole.
11
And the lies about our military aggressions are always bipartisan, cutting services is bipartisan too.
They picked more enemies too, China and Russia and Iran are on the plate now. That is why our MSM is stoking the Russia phobia and the China phobia. With Russia Trump crossed the line, the neocons don't like that.
3
The Gulf of Tonkin incident turned out to be a lie.
What if 9/11 were a lie as well?
A simple question.
But that topic is OFF LIMITS and never to be questioned.
I wonder if the truth will come out by 2050 - or will we still be in Afghanistan at that point?
1
@cynicalskeptic
More than likely, the latter.
1
It's not that we don't care. It's that nobody cares that we do care.
6
Ho-hum. We’re looking at this from the “8-miles high” view we’re taught is “history” in grade school. Edited accounts of colonial overlords juxtaposed with savagery on the part of the local citizenry, who just refused to understand that submission would make it all go away, including a cultural multigenerational way of life. The “old way” wasn’t necessarily better, but it was their way.
I don’t know anyone who believed we were improving anything by replacing regional clan-based bakshish culture with a centralized, higher stakes, more corrupt central government.
We never understood Afghani social and cultural dynamic#, any more than we “got it” about the power of religious fundamentalism in in Iran or the sacrifices local folks are willing to resist government corruption and oppression, as with Vietnam.
And so forth.
What they all have in common with their brothers and sisters in Kansas or Minnesota or New York and their ancestors at Plymouth Rock is they want Big Government to leave them alone to live their daily lives and watch the grandkids grow up.
2
We "lost" the Vietnam War because President Johnson believed that the American public would not support the actions it would take to win. Despite his unquestioned mastery of that era's American political scene, history has proven him wrong.
As a friend who has an important military background and experience in Afghanistan, and a number of significant post-2001 civilian assignments, has said "We are still in Afghanistan because we will soon face a super Al-Qaeda if we vacate the space." That was in answer to my 2008 question as to why we were still there.
To this day, he has not changed his assessment as he and his (mostly Afghani) teams have continued to survive major attacks in his sector of Kabul's Green Zone.
What's even more disturbing is that today it isn't just the Taliban and Al-Qaeda operating in the space; ISIS has also forced its way in.
We will choose to leave Afghanistan at some point. At that time, we will need to have an effective plan in place to counteract these enemy actors, for at this point they have no plans to quit - or anything remotely like it. Our enemies' view is an extremely long one, and it outstrips our culture's view by a minimum of many decades.
I don't recall who first said it, but I'm of the belief that this conflict will go on for generations. Our job as Americans should be to minimize the loss of life on both sides while ensuring the carnage remains as far offshore as possible. Anything less is neither politically nor morally defensible.
there is enough blame to go around for all...politicans not wanting to be the ones who lost China, Korea, Vietnam, etc, voters with a clear choice Nixon vs McGovern, military-industrial complex wars that may be profitable for some but is in the end are a drag on prosperity ,e.g. 1990s peace dividend when DOD budgets were cut. So before we all go blaming the "deep state" look in our political mirror to see who is responsible for lessons not being learned.
3
Of course we care. Why the WaPo put this story out in the middle of a presidential impeachment is hard to grasp.
Also, on some level it's possible people are starting to understand that war is good for the economy, that taxpayer money is funneled into a red-hot defense industry that employs a lot of people. What other explanation could there be, when people get so upset about paying taxes but don't turn a hair when they learn how their tax money is wasted?
1
We do and did care. The time for action against this illegal war was before it started. Remember “Not in my name” ? Did Mr, Douthat support that movement? If not, he has no business passing judgment on what we find important at this time. We saw this coming.
4
We care! But, what power do we have? Especially so given the news cycle largely generated by trump's volatile temperament. He floods the zone with minor (and some major) scandal, lies, personal assaults etc. Against that click bait, what chance does a long, complex story about an even more complex dynamic ("patriotism" vs massive, decades long waste of resources) have? Zero.
2
@rodo
Think of Hong Kong and Paris for starters. The time for whining in front of the computer is over. The only way those in power will react is if hundreds of thousands take to the streets and chant "enough is enough".
1
"...military and civilian officials feeding the press over-optimistic assessments of a likely unwinnable conflict, conducting clever statistical manipulations to create illusions of success, telling hard truths in private while lying subtly or baldly in their public statements."
Isn't one of the primary jobs, of a news source, to get the facts?
We don't just assume that we'll get the facts, from a single source.
1
Thanks for being truthful about the fact that the Pentagon has used the mainstream media as a propaganda tool for decades and the media, NYTimes included, was none the wiser. You all printed all of the reports, accepted the narrative, failed to ask questions, failed to fact check, failed to think. Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger wined, dined and courted power players in the media for decades and has allowed them to do his bidding as a true journalist, the iconoclastic Christopher Hitchens, revealed long ago. And you believe yourselves to be the arbiters of news and information. No wonder the vast majority of Americans have distrusted the media for several decades. Long before Trump assumed office, the FBI and CIA have been utilizing the mainstream media as a means of propagandizing. To political scientists, this is not surprise whatsoever. And when someone truly reveals the sinister, nefarious and morally evil doings of our clandestine, unelected government, they are imprisoned (ex. Assange). Americans should question everything. Question the intentions of the media. Question that which they present as "news". Question the narrative they all run with. Question Iraq, Iran, Syria, North Korea, Russian Collusion, Ukraine, etc. Thanks for pointing out the obvious to anyone who was paying attention. When I read the NYTimes, as it pertains to Afghanistan or any other conflict, I question everything.
7
@Joshua Folds , CIA's Operation Mockingbird, among others. The "Frank Church" Democrats who once cared about exposing this stuff and bringing accountability have mostly been purged from the party (or are smeared by their own Democratic Party colleagues as a "Russian asset," etc.)
4
@Joshua Folds
".... the Pentagon has used the mainstream media as a propaganda tool for decades and the media, NYTimes included, was none the wiser."
"None the wiser?" really?
@Joshua Folds
Nothing has changed, mainstream media is feeding us the government lies 24/7. Never questioning government intentions. The nation is afflicted with Russia and China phobia already. Whatever happens, Putin did it is the instant response.
1
Wait a minute Ross. Didn't war mongering neocons like you push America into needless wars with Iraq, in Afghanistan and continuous saber rattling in Iran? I see your colleague Bret Stephens urging America every day to go to war with Iran to cure his Israel obsession. Have you compared notes?
9
It's so much more than endless wars; we've learned to live with endless lies. Lies, Mr. Douthat. This is not about then. This is about now. You, yourself, defend the lies every time you support this administration. You preach the lies to your readers. And now you wonder why we believe? Please.
6
@Rachel Hoffman
The Democrats are in it too, it is bipartisan to stoke Russia and China phobia. Pundits don't ask questions, don't analyze, all they do is report government talking points.
1
I am sorry Ross, but you are naive. Did you really think you were being told the truth? It sounds like you were born yesterday!
4
wow so, who ever imagined that our military leaders would trump up victory out of the jaws of stalemate? goodness gracious! this entire debacle started with bin laden bringing down the twin towers and damaging the pentagon. he knew our nature, he knew that the "war" such as it was, would lead to instability in our system and cause us no end of trouble. and finally we have trump, white supremacy, russian bots in the white house and running the senate...wow, what a payoff for him! too bad the republicans are so busy circling the wagons that they can't even come up for air.....
1
It's not a matter of not caring, it's a matter of the people having been so politically marginalized that the government is able to lie at will. It is the responsibility of the voters to hold their representatives to account and call them on their lies - and that no lobger happens, except across the aisles. It doesn't hel either that the military industrial complex is dug into every state like ticks, from where they spread influence through campaign contributions and employment.
5
@expat
There are those potential candidates out there(and their numbers are growing)who do not receive money from lobbyists and those are the candidates you vote for, not the same corrupt corporate/establishment political hacks.
3
Weak soup. Totally left out of this is that Ho Chi Minh did not disturb one shovel of US soil or pay to support the Viet Cong flying Boeing 707s into American skyscrapers.
Endless middle east wars continue because it is so easy to play the terrorism card.
Also, the fact that we don't DECLARE war anymore plays a very large role in why we are still in Afghanistan and Iraq.
5
The American public does care. But we don't believe that anybody cares that we care. Millions flooded the streets in an attempt to prevent the beginning of the Iraq war. And how many in our representative government listened?
3
@SRF not millions by any stretch. Maybe millions in Europe but in the US the anti war movement was quite small. I was in it, it was not well received.
3
@SRF
Then vote for candidates who are unencumbered by lobbyists money and are committed to making real change, not answering to the whims of their corporate donors. It is sad that the democratic party has chosen to ignore democracy by making it very difficult for alternative candidates to primary those "corrupt" representatives in the party that are answerable only to their donors and not their constituency.
2
Alongside the tragic and totally unnecessary loss of American blood and treasure in Afghanistan is the fact that we longer need GPS to let us know where it is and how to get there in the fastest, most direct way.
Will we ever learn? More's the pity.
Ross Douthat's fellow conservatives created this war. Iraq war was an even greater lie and still is a debacle.
Like the other commenters said, take the liberal stance and pour $2 trillion into sustainable energy initiatives. We would be able to squash our dependence on oil-rich countries whose populations still have 5th century's way of thinking.
Idk how people can continue to vote for the GOP. America is the land of the ignorants, indeed.
4
So what was hiding in plain sight and obvious to any observer is now a "bombshell" simply because FOIA revealed some generals' candid assessments?
A hunt for Bin Laden, delegated to an unmotivated Northern Alliance morphed into an unwinnable fight against an endemic Taliban. No one could even describe what victory looked like.
1
...and this is why W. remains the worst President in my adult lifetime!
5
@Bowden, While i won't disagree about how disagreeable Dubya was, you're selling dumpy trumpy short: stable genius won't take a back seat to anyone - he is the worst ever and it is not even close!
1
Americans have always been pretty happy to support a war. The aberration is only when war is opposed by large numbers of Americans, not when it is supported. It's difficult to find a notable period of American history that doesn't involve the US being involved in a war. It should be clear that despite our mock protestations Americans want to go to war. We shouldn't keep pretending its something we struggle mightily to avoid. We rush into it rather quickly.
1
I wonder if a huge military budget has something to do with this. The job of a military is to make war and that's a mindset that's difficult to change. Slashing the military budget and demanding that approvals from Congress are required no matter would be a good thing. The military mindset keeps Americans on an us vs. them state of constant standby. It also makes other peoples angry and hateful toward the US which in turn creates a situation in which military minds want to be ready for attacks. It's important to realize that not every country wants to be like us. Our meddling in the Middle East got us 9/11. Do we really want another one?
You couldn't do the Afghanistan war with draftees. You needed volunteer mercenaries to fight it for 18 years.
2
I watch this war through NYTimes from Mr.Bob Herbert,Mr. Roger Cohen, Mr.Thomas L Friedman to the readers comment section,from the horrible stories of war veterans that carries ghosts with them in the form of PTSD to the books of war " War is a Racket" by Major General Smedley Darlington Butler and " The lonely Soldier, the private war of women serving in Iraq" by Helen Benedict.
Stories of media outlets about homeless war veterans, in chilled December nights, medical treatment..
Story of NYTimes that How a Lady soldier left her 2, 3 years old daughter while serving in Afghanistan and after few years when she returned home her daughter didn't recognised her...
Frankly it is pathetic beyond any limit.
It is Human disaster , wars are human disaster not only American.
4
Ross, I wonder what you make of the Post's documentation of Trump's 16,000 plus lies?
We are also being lied to about Libya, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Ukraine, MENA countries in general and many African countries. All while being told we are exceptional. We're accustomed to be lied to.
2
All lies – and jest...
Still – a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest...
- TB -
1
Follow the money. Neo-Cons and their Democrat enablers. The military industrial complex to infinity and beyond.
2
Mr. Douthat briefly mentioned the reason why these wars stretch into perpetuity, namely that most Americans don't have skin in the game.
The all-volunteer force has compartmentalized the human cost of the military industrial complex to a minute fraction of Americans. Recent estimates I've seen say only 3% of all Americans serve on active duty, Reserves, and Nation Guard combined. Once in however, you'll discover that almost everyone you serve alongside has at least one relative that served as well. Sixty percent of dependent children go on to serve in some capacity.
The move to volunteer service has become in fact a warrior caste of Americans, who recruit only from the poorest and most desperate, to fight wars throughout the globe without end. It keeps KBH, BAE, Raytheon, Norhthrop Grumman, and all the others well into the black. From the suburbs, your kid is safe from a draft, and your mutual funds look great.
Why would you object to a war old enough that if it was a human, it could be recruited?
1
Maj. Gen. Fox Connor who was the mentor for Eisenhower, Patton, Clark, Gavin etc. had but three rules for when the U.S. should go to war. 1. Don’t fight unless you have to. 2. Don’t fight alone. 3. Don’t fight for long.
3
It's hard to imagine the Afghanistan Papers having any real effect. We've seen this time and again, and this is just the latest in a series. The same article could be written about Iraq. Your paper and a lot of your colleagues helped cheerlead us right into that one.
You make excellent points in this article. I hope it all matters. But I suspect Cheney, Kristol, and Boot are just aching to give it one more college try....well, have someone else's kids...give it one more college try in Iran.
3
@Scott , and don't forget Victoria Nuland, Bob Kagan, Samantha Powers, and other messianic, intervene-everywhere fanatics on the "left". . .
2
This American and millions of others have not learned to live with endless wars. This is why we supported John Kerry in 2004; worked to elect the Democrats to regain control of Congress in 2006; watched with dismay as they failed to impeach Bush-Cheney for worse than, yes, anything done by Trump (WMD lies about Iraq, for one); watched with dismay as Obama-Biden continued the wars their entire 8 years, ending their tenure as longest wartime prez and VP in US history; watched with disgust as Obama-Biden-Hillary expanded the Bush-Cheney style neo-con, intervention-first regime change actions to other countries that never attacked US soil and had zero connection to 9/11 (Syria; Libya; Ukraine; Yemen, etc); and watched with continuing disgust as the Democrats nominated the hawkish Hillary Clinton.
Sadly, the Democratic Party has purged the Eugene McCarthy and Bobby Kennedy '68 Democrats on issues of war and peace. Today's Democrats prefer to simply stand in opposition to anything Trump, and thus have cried bloody murder and stood with the military-industrialists like departed Pentagon chief Jim Mattis every time Trump has tried to withdraw from Afghanistan, Syria, etc. Anyone who dares to challenge the intervene-everywhere foreign policy orthodox is now apparently a "Russian asset," such as Tulsi Gabbard on the left or Rand Paul on the right. With exception of those 2, most of Congress refuses to do their job & instead continues to fund these wars. Shameful.
6
This is no surprise. People are easily hoodwinked when war is sold to them, as long as they are not directly involved. The pentagon has been widely successful at conflating "supporting the troops" with warmongering. Everybody is now a "hero" for donning a uniform, how silly.
Wars support the coffers of elected official and the defense industry, that is it. What we cold have done with two trillion dollars!
2
Bush the First and Bush the Second, with a huge assist from Cheney and Rumsfeld, saddled Barack Obama with two ill-conceived, poorly executed military misadventures that already had wreaked political havoc in the Middle East, cost us trillions of dollars that would have been better spent on domestic needs, resulted in tens of thousands of civilian deaths. Whatever you do, Mr. Douthat, do not attribute these two fiascos to President Obama.
The Two Bushes also handed Barack Obama the worst financial meltdown and economic contraction since the Great Depression. By the time Donald Trump walked into the White House for the first time, we already had experienced the longest period of consistent economic expansion and a bull market in real estate and securities not seen in our modern history. To hear the charlatan Donald Trump whine that he was ‘left with an economic disaster’ is simply too much to bear.
And to the folks who intone all of this was ‘worth it’ because it ‘keeps us safe from terrorism’ — and that the first duty of our government is to protect American citizens from violence — please. Don’t even try to go there. Today alone, six people died in a hail of gunfire in Jersey City. Such incidents are commonplace in this country, so much so they go all but unnoticed anymore. If our government’s top priority is to ‘keep us safe,’ repeal that stupid Second Amendment and start melting down the 300 million guns rattling around in private hands in this violent nation of ours.
2
It was no secret that starting a conflict in Afghanistan - beyond bombing the heck out of terrorist training camps- or in Iraq, where we didn't even have legal cover to invade, that the likely outcome would be "you break it; you take it."
We had no clear definition of the goal we needed to achieve; no end strategy; no strategy about how to handle leaving. If you cannot define what winning is, you can't win.
And it was pretty clear that we were talking about long term occupations if we felt we could nation build. Occupations are expensive, and usually fail. Even the Romans had trouble holding their empire.
So I am not sure who bought the lies, who was so incredibly naive that they thought there was a possible good outcome. I have considered the neo-con strategists form the Bush era especially, as a lot like a bunch of drunken frat boys huddled around a Risk board, playing at world domination.
Does it count as lying if no one ever believed you?
1
I knew plenty of religious people back when Bush was President who cheered on the wars. They really didn't care about anything in particular -- they just wanted a war against the evil muslims. It's all part of God's plan, and the second coming of Jesus, you see. The war's expense, people dying, innocents killed -- all collateral to them. This was about End Times.
And so I do not see any chagrin from these same religious people. So what if the war was for naught? We killed lots of muslims and showed them whose boss, and that's all that really mattered. These lies are just part of the package as far as they are concerned.
1
@randy
Those religious fools are also many of the same people that form Trump's base - willing to sell their souls to any huckster for the sake of having a Gorsuch or a Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court and tut-tutting their way into everyone's bedrooms.
2
It is the blood-thirst of the American right bolstered by war profiteers and lack of a draft that keep the wars going.
It is the American right that lies us into war by saying we can steal the oil and pay for it that gets us into wars.
It is the American right's disregard for non-white human death that allows hundreds of thousands of innocent people to be killed in our wars.
It is the American right's constant drum beat of 'patriotism' and 'fear of immigrants' that keeps the carnage flowing in other countries.
It is people like you Ross.
Vote these war mongers out of office in 2020.
4
Let's not forget our mainstream media that reliably makes money on war and the whipping up of war hysteria. It's been going on since William Randolph Hearst made the sinking of the battleship Maine ("Remember the Maine!") our excuse for the Spanish American War 121 years ago. No different than CNN using "Shock and Awe" war coverage in the first Iraq War to establish its brand. And it's worth noting that all or most of these "mistaken" wars have started with cynical government deceptions, from the Maine to the "Tonkin Gulf" to "Weapons of Mass Destruction," and others in between, all eagerly accepted and retailed by the mainstream press, including the Washington Post and the New York Times. It's great that they eventually dig out the ugly historical truth years later (and maybe win Pulitzer Prizes in the process), but it would be much better for all of us if they had challenged these lies when it could have averted these terrible wars. And why do they keep smearing and dismissing Tulsi Gabbard when she speaks out about our endless regime change wars? Will they issue a correction after the next one?
1
One mess and set of lies at a time.
Right now we're in the middle of an impeachment. Let's take care of Trump first, the 2020 election second, and then refocus our attention on Afghanistan once we have more Democrats in Congress and in the White House.
We're all on overload right now.
2
Not a mention of the overwhelming and relentless need of American weapons-system manufacturers to keep those orders comin' in.
3
Want to stop endless wars?
Then re-instate the draft. It is the only way to stop America's endless, pointless, wars.
If middle class kids were in danger of being drafted and killed there would be mass protests in the streets and we would have been out of Afghanistan 15 years ago.
The truth is that as long as poor and minority kids 'volunteer', middle class voters could care less how many of them are maimed and killed.
The difference behind the Vietnam protests and the acceptance of Iraq and Afghanistan in one word, the Draft.
We care about our middle class kids, the poor we are content to use as cannon fodder.
2
World Peace is bad for business. Perpetual War is a most lucrative capitalist arena. This is the lesson of World War II. Here's how the American defense contractors and the Republicans look at it... American dead in WWII, over 400,000; American dead in Vietnam, just over 58,000; American dead in the Bush/Cheney Iraq War II, just under 5,000; American dead after 18 years in Afghanistan, under 2000. Our body count is way down and the Americans and politicians with defense stocks are still making a killing. War profiteering is as American as step-mom and frozen apple pie.
2
I care. I came home from war in Vietnam in June 1970 feeling completely overwhelmed by what I'd experienced, by what I'd witnessed American politicians and South Vietnamese officers and wealthy families being, by what I'd participated in.
I keenly followed events surrounding Daniel Ellsburg's "Pentagon Papers" and bought a copy as soon as one was available. I learned that not only did my emotional and intellectual response to the war in Vietnam have foundation, but learned from my nation's response that there were motives operating in our culture, society and government that had nothing to do with simplistic concepts of good and bad, right and wrong, legal and illegal, just and unjust. They were driven by irrationality, greed, ideology and forces that had nothing to do with "God Bless America, land of the free."
I've never forgotten my reaction, I never will forget. My reaction is why I'm not at all surprised to learn this news about Afghanistan. My reaction is why I was not all surprised to learn that the Center for Public Integrity compiled a list of 935 lies told by the Bush Administration to lead us to war in Iraq.
Some of us. Ross, do still believe in Lincoln's ideal of government of, by and for the people, and not just of, by, and for Americans either. Afghans have paid far more deeply for our sins than have we.
5
As someone Xoxarle noted below, the fact that we have a 'professional' army is why the public and politicians care so little. I would add that the army is made up of kids pulled from lower socio-economic backgrounds, not the children of Congresspersons, pundits or white collar professionals. Our leaders effectively have no skin in the 'game'.
1
No one should be surprised, I'm not. Wars are typically political and capitalist/profit driven endeavors. Very rarely are wars for fundamental human rights. The world has a long way to go to overcome our warrior mentality, hunger for power and selfishness. If we don't solve this long time problem, we will destroy our hope for a peaceful and happy existence. Why are people so (self)destructive.
2
I knew we were lied to. I care now, I cared then. But I am powerless to DO anything about the lies.
The wars were started by George W Bush because his 'advisor' and VP Dick Cheney encouraged him, and the pretext was the horror of 9/11, which had nothing to do with either Iraq or even Afghanistan. I didn't vote for GWBush. I actively campaigned against him.
Once the military presence was in place, when there are absolutely no metrics for 'success of the war', it was harder and harder to remove the soldiers. Even DJ Trump, for whom I did not vote, promised to bring the troops home.
Kurt Vonnegut, Joseph Heller, George Orwell all have written of this kind of insanity.
The same thing happened in Vietnam. Lies and the specter of Communism created the horror of that war.
But my 'caring' has never helped end the useless wars.
4
We weren't attacked by terrorists using Vietnam as a base. That's a pretty big difference. Does it really not matter?
The $2 trillion spent on Afghanistan would have built a lot of U.S. railroad miles, bridges, and roads. But I suppose it was better spent on munitions and creating enemies.
3
John Kerry once asked "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?" Some 15 years ago, slimy political attack ads helped defeat Kerry's campaign for president those who got us bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan based on nothing but lies. But we're still here and we, as a nation, still have not been able to answer his question.
Not everyone has "learned to live" with endless wars, but there is only so much that we can do when neither our voices nor our votes can rise above the din of moneyed interests and the military-industrial complex that run our oligarchy.
2
Heh, heh- Well Ross,all that seems to be missing in this instance of our own 2019 version of a Forever War- like the one in Vietnam- is that our Commander in Chief ,a year before his second run at office is scheduled, suddenly announces that he "Has a secret plan" to end the War. Opps, spoke too soon. Last week didn't Donald J. Trump announce that he is now "Negotiating" with the Taliban to get us out of Afghanistan. Who was it that said: The more things change, the more things stay the same? 1972, here we come (again).
Not sure that a "Bernie Sanders presidency" would finally trace a slow descent of troops there down to zero. Bernie Sanders is sadly as much a military Keynesian uber alles as all the rest of them. Take a look at his iron-clad support for Lockheed's budget-busting F-35 fighter jet and basing it amidst Vermont's most densely populated neighborhoods, regardless of negative impact to health and home values of the very demographics the Democrats pretend to care about. Immigrant refugees; working poor; working class; retirees; veterans, etc.
Some veterans did their service on an aircraft carrier long ago and now retired, do not want to de facto remain living on one, while watching the sole asset of their home diminish in value thanks to Bernie and Senator Leahy's new F35 "not suitable for residential use" zone. Bernie talks the talk but walks the military Keynesian walk, over and over again.
1
@GRH , Bernie is leading all presidential candidates in donations from defense industry. Including versus even Trump and "moderates" like Biden. As people in Vermont have been forced to confront, military-industrial contractors and unions know they can depend on Bernie to protect their jobs. Regardless of what this means for all of the rest of the priorities Bernie talks about. Not going to be easy to pay for Medicare for All; nor "free college for everyone" when the US remains on a permanent war footing, with Lockheed, Raytheon, Northrop-Grumman, Boeing, etc. on the permanent federal gravy-train.
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/bernie-gets-more-cash-from-war-inc-than-any-2020-candidate/
Of course we care, and we've always known that the situation is hopeless. But we can't do anything about the situation. The US locked itself into this the day we went in there, and there's no way out.
1
About a month after 9-11, the Taliban offered us bin Laden and his lieutenants' heads on a plater to Washington for a $12 billion, about as much as GHW Bush and Clinton have given that government over the previous nine years. The U.S. aid had been used to successfully reduce malnutrition and almost eliminate opium poppy production in the country--taking it down to around five percent of what production had been before the Taliban (the Students) took over.
Instead, we went to war against these people trying to get past decades of war with the Russians. We blamed them for the leader of al Qaeda hiding in a remote corner of the desolate mountains that fill much of their country.
Given this ham-handed approach, I wondered why the Air National Guard of Georgia wasn't used to bomb the mountains of Appalachia where Eric Rudolph, the terrorist who attacked the Olympic Plaza in Atlanta had been harbored by those nasty South Carolinians. That is, if that would really work.
1
Of coarse we don't care. No draft, so no one is in danger of having to go, and it's rare that anyone even knows anybody in the military much less someone who has been deployed. Taxes haven't been raised to to pay for it, so the war is "free". And let's not forget all this "diversity" the left loves so much. We now have almost nothing in common with each other. We are all now separated by: language, culture , politics, religion, ethnicity, the internet, take your pick, so if someone down the street is affected by the war you probably don't know them and it has no effect on you. Put it all together with an economy where the top is making hand over fist and most people even with a "good" job are falling further behind who has time to care? As the Balkanization of America continues there will be less and less that affects anymore than a sliver of the country.
1
To me, all volunteer equates with mercenary. And the lack of a draft or a form of compulsory public service, detaches the greater mass of the public from commitment to The People.
2
Yet another sign of the plutocracy in action. It decides what it wants to do, and does just enough public relations to eliminate large-scale public dissent.
In the meantime the American public is anesthetized with YouTube, Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook, cable television, video games, and streaming video chanels.
A large percentage of the American population simply doesn't care about anything else but its own entertainment, pleasure and material comfort.
1
The sad fact is that no thinking human needed to be told any of the information that was released in these documents. We've known from the outset that the Afghanistan conflict was unwinnable (read a history book). We've known that our leaders lied us into the conflict and if you consume more than pentagon briefings and one or two news sources, you know that every intervention, be it economic, military or nation building was basically an utter failure. The only thing surprising here is people acting like this information is surprising.
2
What disturbs me most is the thought of the young women and men who are being sent into wars where they are killed or maimed whether physically or psychologically or both. They are deployed repeatedly regardless of the losses they suffer. It also seems that while many of these soldiers have enlisted out of patriotism, many also join out of economic necessity. This situation cannot provide for a healthy American society.
2
It's helped keep us safe from terrorism...wasn't that the real goal? Over the last 20 years we have greatly reduced the threat of terrorism on our shores. At great cost, yes, but we are fortunate to have the resources. In a democracy, citizens demand first and foremost to be safe. Political leaders need to be responsive to that, or they won't stay in power.
There are quite a few failed states and lawless regions in the world, but only a few seem to be the biggest magnets for terrorists. Afghanistan is one of them. Isn't it worth keeping some troops there to deal with that? No, Afghanistan is not going to turn into Switzerland. But the political development of Afghanistan is ultimately the responsibility of the Afghan people.
I would like to find a person who actually thinks that being or staying in Afghanistan is a good idea. Then I would like to ask this person why?
Also, why don't we ask all these people running for elected office why we are still there?
1
Anybody who thinks that America "lost" the Iraq War, the War in Afghanistan, the endless wars in Libya, Syria, Yemen, etc., etc., etc. doesn't understand the first thing about why wars are fought in the first place.
Other than for securing our access to oil, our wars are fought for the benefit and enrichment of the Military Industrial Complex, the shareholders of defense contractors, and the politicians in both major parties for whom the political donations are an unending cornucopia.
Thus understood, the US has "won" all these wars. This is why truth--which Mr. Douthat gives lip service to caring about--is always the first casualty of war.
305
@Greg Gerner It's really not that simple, much of the military industrial complex really doesn't like war, they benefit from some aspects of war but it also upsets their normal routine of planning and selling which they prefer. Some contractors get a lot of business in war they wouldn't otherwise, however a lot of money spent on war leads to lean times, the complex would prefer stabilty.
1
@Greg Gerner
Capitalism feeds on wars and eats up its own children.
They need an enemy, Russia, and China are great candidates
7
I know this may be beside the point but I blame the TV national/world news. I don't know if the don't have the budgets for boots on the ground or they consider world news not to be evident outside the USA.
I cannot remember any worlds TV news article covering Afghanistan in a long long time. It's a forgotten war because the new organizations have determined it to be so.
@Bikerman Watch PBS.
1
RE: Over 50 percent of the country still trusted the federal government to do the right thing at least most of the time in the early Nixon years; today the equivalent figure is 17 percent.
With the President having apparently lied more than 10,000 times since taking office, I guess the real question is why is it so high?
2
The last paragraph is poignant. We know this war continues to be a mistake. We know it costs billions that we must borrow to fund. But somehow we're powerless to stop it.
The article addresses one side of warfare: our citizen's relationship to those with whom we are fighting. It doesn't address our relationship with the citizens whom we are fighting with. In the past, our wars have followed one of two models: either based on presumption of equality vs the people of another country, or based on the presumption of superiority. Our wars with Germany exemplified the former; our occupation of the Philippines exemplified the latter. In the first case, we would enter into conflict with, and perhaps try to destroy, a government and its army, but then would leave the people to form another government, possibly with some restrictions and/or support. In the second case, we indeed found decades-long occupations possible because we didn't believe the people were equal to the task of governing themselves. (The form of restrictions and support allowed intermediate positions as well -- e.g. Japan & Korea)
What Douthat is saying is that the second model is increasingly winning out. This is bad; Douthat shouldn't pretend that it is new.
Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.
- Orwell
1
I keep hearing about the "wasted money" that was supposedly spent on this war. However, the Keynesians here should understand just how much of this spending was stimulus. I do not agree with continued prosecution of this war. I spent my time overseas, and knew this wasn't winnable a decade ago.
So where did the money go? Much, probably hundreds of billions went to the Afghan government and was lost to graft of corruptions. The rest went to US contractors, businesses, and military members themselves. New equipment (MRAPs made by Oshkosh, for example) as well as countless other business pumped money into local manufacturing and jobs. Local military bases saw huge swings in purchases after a year of tax free deployment. Cars, restaurants, etc pumped billions into local economies and local/state governments (taxes). I saw Soldiers spend excessively after returning from deployments. Stock prices of defense contractors, many with dividends, stayed high. Much of this spending came after the 08 crash, and many Soldiers were able to avoid a dismal job market. Much of this war spending made its way back to the American people. It is not like it was buried under a rock and lost forever. I am not saying this was an efficient stimulus, nor should this be a reason to support endless war. I saw first hand how defense jobs and contracts trickled down to the middle class.
47
@Steve so endless war is good for our economy so keep it going. america is great.
8
@Steve Re "So where did the money go? .... Much of this war spending made its way back to the American people. It is not like it was buried under a rock and lost forever. "
No, that would be the countless thousands of humans -- many of them innocent casualties of American lying -- who were buried under rocks and lost forever.
13
@Steve
Given all the money spent its amazing what a poor stimulus it has been. Imagine what the benefits would have been if that money had been spent on infrastructure projects, R&D and social programs?
I have defense stocks (small potatoes) and the profit margins are incredible.
7
As far as i remember, the war in afghanistan started because the taliban refused to give up bin laden after 911. This might have been expected from the central asian hospitality tradition. A guest is (relatively) sacred and will certainly not be surrendered to some foreign power. So we went afghanistan to destroy bin laden, and punish the talibans for not giving him up. This attitude is well known in europe, when during the last the nazis executed hostages who would not give up terrorists. Of course the taliban are horrible and have strange ideas about women and freedoms, though not very different from some republicans... that being said they had nothing to do with 9-11, which was almost exclusively a saudi affair. Now the bin laden has been disposed of, why are we still in afghanistan?
In iraq, bush destroyed saddam hussein on the slimmest of excuses, to please the saudi (and enrich the veep), freeing the space for a wahhabite-inspired regime, isis. And we still consider the saudi as our best friends.
I wanted to take out a full-page ad as »bush finally beats bin laden! » when the number of american soldiers killed in iraq became greater than the number of innocents killed in 9-11. And i’m not even speaking of iraqi, syrian and afghan civilians, or the others who died in terrorist attacks stimulated by these wars.
Maybe it is indeed time to reconsider exactly what we’re doing there.
Pehaps running out of lebanon and somalia was the right decision!
2
Mr. Douthat:
I seem to recall that you have supported our incursions into
foreign lands in your past columns. Strongly. Is this column a
sign of growing maturity on your part? Or just a distraction from your inability to deal with impeachment and the shameless behavior of the GOP? How do you feel about that issue, anyhow? Disgraceful.
3
As we were going to war in Afghanistan, I looked up the country in the CIA World Factbook. Today I repeated that exercise. Afghanistan looks remarkably similar in 2019 to it's condition in 2001. If any part of the American involvement in Afghanistan had nation building as a goal, we have been totally unsuccessful.
The September 11 attackers were predominantly Saudi, with one each Egyptian and Lebanese, and two Emiratis. I never saw any evidence that Afghans were sponsors of international terrorism, they have plenty to do fighting invaders and each other. Al Qaeda was (and is) legitimately our enemy. We prosecuted war against them and gave tit for tat. Maybe that gave them pause or maybe not. But, they are representative of an ideology that is shared by a significant minority of 1.8 billion people, that is billion with a B. And they are a danger primarily to that 1.8 billion people, who, in the final analysis must defend themselves against the viper in their own bosom.
The Big Lie is what kind of war we are fighting in Afghanistan. Americans only have the stomach for short, total wars- or even better (American) bloodless blitzkriegs, all shock and awe. Thus the lie that victory is just around the corner (like Vietnam). Like Vietnam, or the US-Indian wars, Afghanistan is a counterinsurgency war (hearts and minds, torture, disruption, destruction, genocide if necessary), which requires time- decades sometimes- and despicable methods incompatible with Democracy, in the words of Conrad's Kurtz,
“But his soul was mad. Being alone in the wilderness, it had looked within itself and, by heavens I tell you, it had gone mad.” “The horror! The horror!"
Dear Media,
The entire nation knew how badly things were and are going over there it's YOU who time after time just promote the same lies always told
2
There is nothing new here. Most impartial intelligent observers in Afghanistan understood this years ago. What is really shocking is we have not held the Bush/Cheney regime and the Republican Party accountable for starting two unnecessary wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The lies and manipulations the Republicans used to start these wars should not be forgotten. We are witnessing the same things now with the Trump Administration and who can predict how bad things are going to get. Let’s also not forget Saudi Arabia’s continuing influence over Republican presidents and how it has helped get us involved in wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen and possibly Iran.
3
@John Hunter , to some extent the 2016 primary voters did hold that version of the Republican Party accountable. This is why Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, etc. were going absolutely no where and someone as demented as Trump could gain traction to begin with. At least Trump acknowledged the insanity and overreach of the Bush-Cheney version of GOP on issues of war and peace and was willing to directly call out Jeb Bush on this during the primaries.
2
The difference? During the Vietnam war kids from our Scout troop were eventually drafted and sent over. Every male student was expecting the call. Everyone was involved. Kill numbers were on tv every night. We all knew people who died or came back.
During Iraq and Afghanistan I haven’t personally known anyone who went over. It is only on tv if there is a big car bombing, most Americans forget we are even there.
5
the conflict in Afghanistan was not unwinnable, but the way it was fought made it so. asymmetrical wars where one side does not care about collateral civilian damage and the other side does cannot be won. instead a policy of containment must be accepted in place of victory. in Afghanistan even containment was made impossible due to the diversion to Iraq and the failure of our efforts to build an American style democracy in a country that has no appreciation or sympathy for individual rights.
Lost on most people is that invading and occupying Afghanistan in 2001 was a foolish idea, based on any reading of history. It wasn't just the Soviets who got bogged down in Afghanistan, but the British before them, multiple times.
In the end, spreading western style, liberal democracy to those uninterested in being converted to it is scarcely different from what Christian missionaries or Islamic armies did in previous eras. Even when assessed in the most generous terms possible, where those spreading the faith are presumably motivated by a desire to enlighten the benighted, these sorts of activities are hopelessly misguided, and unwanted by those targeted for conversion.
5
@Middleman MD , it was total nonsense when Woodrow Wilson was promoting it and it was total nonsense when Bush-Cheney was dressing up their military Keynesianism in the same language to justify their interventions.
At least there is one presidential candidate in 2020 willing to call this out, regardless of how today's media and Democratic Party like to try to smear her as a "Russian asset."
2
Your commentary, tragically, reflects a hard truth: The US government does not represent the people. Politicians lie with impunity because they are almost totally disconnected from public opinion. For decades, they ignored the public despair and frustration with joblessness, the growing disparity between the rich and poor, the erosion of public education, and the insane cost of health care. Put simply, they got away with lying about Afghanistan because they don't care what the American public thinks or wants.
6
A remarkable piece well written. This reminds me of the top 10 percent that makes lots of money and pays little in taxes and the top 10 percent of the military perpetually lying to keep themselves employed. No wonder there is no trust the next thing we will probably learn is that our 401k’s, our investments portfolios, and retirement pension aren’t really there.
Ken Burns, the veteran US documentary-maker, who recently chronicled the Vietnam War, remarked on Twitter: “Mark Twain often said that ‘history doesn’t repeat itself but it often rhymes.’ ‘The Afghanistan Papers’ and ‘The Pentagon Papers’ certainly rhyme in that sense.”
What's sad is that military and political leaders don't seem learn a lesson.
6
@J. von Hettlingen
They know EXACTLY what they're doing..."follow the money". Nothing will change until voters demand it, spiraling deficits are a serious threat to this country.
2
I could've told you this was a waste of time back in 2012. As a young LT at the time, no one from my President to my Company Commander could tell me what victory looked like. Each deployment was simply an opportunity for a positive OER. Whether we left Afghanistan then, tomorrow, or in 10 years I suspect we will get the same result: the country will fail and all the blood and treasure spent will have been wasted.
But hey, someone got a sweet OER bulletpoint along the way- and that's what really matters.
3
I always wondered why we went into Afghanistan instead of Saudi Arabia. Nine our of the ten men who destroyed the World Trade Center, half of the Pentagon building and a plane crash in Pennsylvania were Saudi Nationalists. Will this question ever be answered?
2
@Jean Yes, all that and the Saudis are still our "allies."
@Jean
Simple, the Saudis buy hundreds of millions of dollars worth of arms from U.S. companies every year. We buy billions of dollars worth of Saudi oil every year.
Going to war is no way to treat one of your best business partners.
Never forget America is all about the $$$$$$$$.
@Jean
Because al-Qaida was in Afghanistan. The fact that they were born in Saudi Arabia doesn't change that.
Its interesting and depressing that in our supposed Progressive Left Wing democratic party only Liz Warren and Corey Booker has said they would remove all troops from Afghanistan. Evidently there is no end to our wasting blood and treasure in an undeveloped country any more.
1
@Michael Cohen , Tulsi Gabbard anyone? She has called for a Congressional inquiry on this matter. At least war hawk Tim Ryan went no where in his presidential quest (and his calls for continued permanent war in Afghanistan).
1
Graveyard of Empires. American empire sank it's foot in the quicksand of history.
1
I saw this coming on or around September 20th, 2001. I had just arrived legally in the US, which had been my hope for years, and was in the passenger seat of my friend's car when I suddenly felt a sadness wash over me.
I told her that in striking back with a sledgehammer, we'd set a chain of events in motion that would eventually bankrupt the country.
She (an American), replied yes - but you have to understand that we're a young country and we don't have the maturity to temper those desires.
I've thought about that conversation time and time again for the last 18 years.
4
"As with other features of our decadence, a Pax Americana sustained by indefinite police actions, indefinitely frozen conflicts and indefinite postponements of defeat is hardly the worst geopolitical scenario imaginable..."
Yes it is. I'd much rather see American hegemony decline and we stop using low-income citizens as cannon fodder.
1
this article neglects to say that the mission in Afghanistan is a NATO lead mission. The involvement has transitioned from defeat the Taliban to train the Afghan military to do the fighting. This endless so called war, so characterized because the US is not at war with a state but with terrorist supporters, has morphed into a peacekeeping mission and the US has been involved in those all over the world, South/North Korea DMZ being a prominent example.
One close comparison, Vietnam was considered a proxy war with communist China. Could war against the Taliban be considered a proxy war with ultra Orthodox Islam and the Saudi Wahhabist sect?
The US has a military machine that will always be spending money and sending troops abroad as long as its funding is secure. US troops are deployed and die all over the world. Afghanistan is now just one of many places American troops are injured or killed. The conversation is a much bigger one than questioning the value of Afghanistan as a country and a people to America.
5
If we expand this perspective to our foreign and domestic affairs in general, we get a situation where we lie and kid ourselves about the prospect of solving any of our problems. Meanwhile we embrace policies and programs that will keep our problems from getting so bad that failure cannot be hidden and we are forced to think outside the envelope. We tell ourselves that solutions are in place but will take a while to work, while knowing in our hearts that they wont. We spend enough resources to make our lies believable to those who still believe; meanwhile, the resources we do spend supply jobs and profits and create interest groups that will fight and scheme to keep these resources budgeted in next year's appropriations whether they are working or needed or not.
This is how we approach poverty, income and wealth differentials, health care, our drug problem, guns, our huge prison population, global warming, infrastructure, and all the other chronic problems we have been throwing money at for years.
2
“American failure and hubris in Afghanistan”.
The word ‘hubris’ relates most closely with the ‘disease’ of Empire as our founders well knew from their deep understanding of Roman history when they acknowledged that “the disease of Republics is Empire” and that ‘hubris’ is the path to EMPIRE (or what now could be called ‘Empire-thinking’) [George Lakoff UC Berkeley].
This 2nd set of War Papers, as well as Financial Papers (like the Panama Papers), Corporate Papers, Crony Capitalist Papers (regarding making faux-profits through dumping ‘negative externality costs’ on ‘others’), and the ubiquitous Political Papers (of deceit, bribery, and high crimes and misdemeanors by both these Vichy Parties) provides incontrovertible evidence that that “Hubris” has birthed Empire — and that malformed monster is now so clearly and obviously the current, first, and last Disguised Global Crony Capitalist EMPIRE —- which “The Post” should fully expose, educate, and with a “Shout (not shot) heard round the world” rally ‘we the American people’ to an alarm more pressing now than in 1775 that “the Empire is coming”, “the Empire is coming”, “the Empire is here!”, which “The Post” could easily do by expanding your brave and honest daily, front page, mast head, banner alarm to “Democracy Dies In Darkness Under Empire”.
1
"The Washington Post’s reporting should be shocking, but in the current environment it’s hard to imagine any reader actually being shocked."
Well, your conclusion isnt at all surprising with the Chief Executive we have now who is a pathological liar and has no problem inventing things out of thin air. What does surprise me is the fools around him who aid and abet the daily lying (even when confronted with the truth), and those who vote for them.
4
Brilliant column, Ross. One of your best. I'm reading David Halberstam's "The Powers That Be." In it, he details with the release of the Pentagon Papers the sustained lies of some of our best and brightest officials. He also wrote "The Making of a Quagmire: America and Vietnam During the Kennedy Era."
There's plenty of responsibility to go around. And David Volker's remarkable obituary highlighted the economic consequences: an inflation rate of 2% a month and interest rates topping out at 20%. Somehow we've been spared those dangers that shut down our economy in the early 80s. But we haven't been spared the "quagmire".
1
"(P)olicymakers lied their way not toward a Vietnam-style debacle but through a strategic transition." That is an 18 year and counting transition. I grow old and shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled. Putin is also laughing at this debacle, and we can't blame it all on D. Trump. Maybe it is time for the conspiracy theorists to focus on something real, like the military industrial complex.
2
The surprise here is what? This was the same technique used in Vietnam and the outcome is even worse. You might think the electorate would wise up but remember anyone who raises so much as a hand to say "wait a minute" is denounced as unpatriotic and unamerican. Then add "We thank you for your service" and military flyovers at every stupid outdoor sports event thinly masked as recruiting efforts. Is it any wonder?
The Pentagon is just like any other bureaucracy, focused on its own long term survival that requires conjuring up new enemies on a regular basis, defining them as existential threats hell bent on exterminating our "way of life" and impoverishing our children. Then cue in the music, the complex, can't get it to work expensive technology from the Lockheed, Boeing, General Dynamics and others, make sure there is a job in every Senators district and shazaam! We have a war to fight and weapons to fire!
Can't say no, because that would be unpatriotic!
3
Bureaucratized lies, a military which desires war because that is its business, all true.
The wonder is President Obama did not extirpate the US completely.
Anyone who has read Sir Max Hastings masterful "Vietnam" will recognize the quagmire syndrome as it originated there carried forth today in Afghanistan.
But the military learned some lessons: Fight your wars with mercenaries (those for whom the best economic option is soldiering) rather than forcibly drafting the unwilling. That way you can continue to wage mayhem (and if you are a SEAL, even murder) with impunity and never place your cash flow at risk.
1
Pretty hard to discuss American interventionism/imperialism without discussing globalization - they are nasty bedfellows.
1
Ugh! The Catholic Church built cathedrals across the world, some of them taking nearly 100 YEARS to complete “with the tools at hand.” Palestine has been fighting for its existence for how long? 60-70 years? The Kurds?
People, we witness the disaster of failed states everywhere, from Yugoslavia to Venezuela to Libia, to Afghanistan under the Taliban, post-Sadam Iraq, the emergence of Desh.
Yes, it falls on us to forestall the failure of an Afghan state, until new tools become available. Every generation has their challenges, you just met yours. Quit whining and get on with it.
The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq simply cannot be discussed independently, as this piece tries to do. Americans and all citizens of the world were appalled by the Bush Administration's rationale and execution of the Iraq War, and the anti-war activism was extremely visible. We directed all of our anger on that "bad" war, while considering Afghanistan to be the "good" war in comparison.
1
Where is the peace movement today? I guess it’s gone extinct like so many plant and animal species.
The lies that have kept us mired in these useless wars are not the apathy of the public but rather the complicity of the mass media in covering up 9/11 Truth. That mother of all conspiracies provided the pretext for these wars in the first place.
We John and Jane Q Public people have no desire to take self sacrificial action to oppose these wars knowing that you media mavens will mock misrepresent and malign us.
When you repent of your complicity with the great 9/11 Terror Charade, then and only then will we take action.
Until then, we will regard you as the Whoreporate Mess Media and Enemies of the Truth and our Souls.
2
Vietnam, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan.
War profiteering only works if you use the consumables
1
The last time that America debated, declared and paid for war was on December 8, 1941 against the Empire of Japan.
Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany declared war on America.
America was an ally of the Soviet Union.
Ever since Congress has ceded it's duties and powers to debate and declare and pay for war to the President of the United States. And the American people have been corruptly and cowardly complicit in this scheme to shred the constitution of our divided limited different power republic.
Since 9/11/01 a mere 0.75% of Americans have volunteered to wear the military uniform of any American armed force.
While the rest of us pretend to be brave honorable and patriotic by rising to sing the national anthem and salute the flag at sporting events.
What is happening in Afghanistan is an ethnic sectarian civil war by ethnic Pashtun to have a nation state where they are a majority. While the Pashtun are a 40% plurality in Afghanistan most Pashtun live in Pakistan where they are a mere 15% of Pakistanis.
Moreover, they don't call Afghanistan the 'Graveyard of Empires' for nothing. From Alexander the Great to Queen Victoria to the Soviet Union and America you have avarice, bigotry and hubris burying their imperial delusions.
The Taliban has nothing to fear from the likes of Ross Douthat, Bret Stephens, Donald Trump, Jr., Ivanka Trump, Eric Trump, Tiffany Trump, Matt Gaetz, Jared Kushner, Lara Trump, Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows.
5
Maybe we would have fewer wars if our leaders had to strap on the armor and lead the charge like Henry V.
3
Many Americans still buy lies because they believe the 9/11 attacks came directly from the Afghanistan-based al-Qaida and Taliban movements. Just as they were misled into supporting the Iraq invasion by lies and insinuations that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11.
the 9/11 attacks were planned in Germany and Spain, and conducted mainly by US-based Saudis to punish America for supporting Israel’s repression of the Palestinians.
3
If at first you don't succeed keep banging your head and everyone else's head against the blood soaked brick wall. Arrogance, hubris, exceptionalism, no other country has won 'The Great Game', we'll be the first, we don't read history that records unwinnable wars, we don't listen to experts: John Paton Davies Jr., we purge them...
It never ceases to amaze how incredibly dense and stupid, greed, power, riches, me 'noble savage', me number one, make of homo sapiens ability to live up to its name—wise man. And how we have failed to recognize that fear is our true enemy and how we have made it our Achilles heel: Fear of the unknown, fear of the different, fear of manufactured bogeymen, fear of the other ... and fear of "bloodier alternatives", which is by no means a certainty and certainly does not have to be a reality— that is a choice we as a species can make, if we want to.
Instead of these dubious, senseless wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, then countless unrealistic attempts to bring democracy to these collapsing regimes, after nearly two decades of battles, sacrificing thousands of innocent civilians and our troops, our young American heroes, (kids basically) who year after year served this country with unquestionable loyalty and unimaginable bravery.
They do deserve much better, after their ultimate sacrifices for our land, than coming home to tribally divisive nation to be used as a puns in his next mad rally.
Their dedication could be served much better if we decide to rebuild our country that reflects the ideals and hopes of present and future generations.
WAPO just published Afghanistan Papers A Secret History of the Warhttps://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/investigations/afghanistan-papers/afghanistan-war-confidential-documents/
History at it again...Pentagon Papers.
Enough!!!
At this point another installment of La Comédie humane would be greatly anticipated, but for that we need Balzac 2.0, that fits perfectly for our massively misinformed, poorly read, easily duped base.
So what we have to do is not only get rid of this buffoon in a WH, but we have to wipe the slate clean and kick out all these clowns from our government, who's main goal is to overturn our path for true Democracy!
1
I put much of the blame on Congress for giving a blank check to Pentagon, and the overrecting of the cynically oversimplified GWOT ( Global War On Terrorism) Just like the 'domino' theory, that destroyed so much in my cohert
3
The USA has been on a crusade to control the Worlds Oil Supply. Afghanistan terrritory only serves one purpose to the misguided US Foreign Policy. We are caught in a vain, desparate battle to prevent China from taking control of the flow of oil....even as our own Oil Corportions enthusiaticly sell all the oil in Iraq to....China!
On 9-11...the Taliban was our Ally.......virtually nothing has changed about the Taliban in all those years, they're still wild-eyed fundamentalist islamic hillbillies....the difference is that the USA now occupies their territory.....for extremely far-fetched reasons. Panjir Valley(the Chicken Neck) is the most efficient pathway for a pipeline from Iran to China.
Further....China has built an Oil Port at Gandar, Pakistan(thru some amazing pretzel logic Pakistan remains a US Ally), just at the head of the Persian Gulf...(this is where US-TX based corps send all the Iraqi OIl we recently captured.
The Geopolitics of Oil has changed drasticly. The US refuses to admit that its no longer 1949. WE no longer need to "contain the Soviet Union".....China is no longer open to diplomacy....they are not our friend.....never have been. The earth veritably leaks oil out of every crevice....the US carries on a foolish Hans Binker act trying to plug every leak. Time to move on to Solar Power and become truly Self-Sufficient.
2
Ross - where is your fiscal conservatism - almost a trillion dollars spent for what?
One thing I haven't seen or heard yet. Afghanistan is filled with piles of natural resources that corporations, in the west, want to get their grubby hands on. Just as they take the oil, the diamonds, or whatever--Afghanistan is lousy with rare minerals and components that are crucial to technology. Our government does not care at all about democracy in Afghanistan, or anywhere else, including here. They want to own it, like Venezuela, Bolivia, Brazil, etc., etc. They will use our military (and OUR money,) and our innocent young soldiers (NONE of them from rich families) to get all that stuff, and those soldiers will die for nothing, AGAIN, as they have in dozens of other countries, for decades. You see the consequences of this find of "foreign policy" every single day.
3
George W. Bush started the war in Afghanistan with lots of tough talk, and little thoughtful preparation. He left office 7 years later without much to show for it. In the meantime, he invaded Iraq with stunning incompetence. He left that mess to his successor.
Each nation was like the often cited boulder at the top of a steep hill. The little push that unsettled the stone led quickly to a terrifying, unstoppable avalanche.
Mr Douthat has written a thoughtful essay. But why does he omit to name the fool who led us into this quagmire: GWB. And why fail to name the many wise voices opposing our heedless president's policy: Al Gore, for one.
2
Any one who talks about peace is naive and unrealistic and therefore is considered irrelevant.
Without concrete plans how to stop fighting and create peace with terrorist we will continue to be drawn into wars by our own guilt.
We are guilted into protecting innocent people from thugs.
What we never ask is “Why are there thugs”?
What allows thugs to rise in leadership.
We obviously cannot answer this question because it is happening in our own country right now. We need to look in the mirror and lead by example.
Corruption , corruption , corruption
Money, money, money.
Afghanistan - This is where Bush-Cheney really failed America. They should have dropped in 200,000 combat troops, ready or not frankly in there by Nov, 2001. Our men fought in North Africa and Guadelcanel months after Pearl Harbor. Of course the reason we are STILL in Afghanistan is tied to why we did not go there but Iraq. Bush is oil money. Cheney is oil money. Republicans beat the Patriotic War vote. Republicans use war as Industrial Socialism - for the Military - Defense Industry. The GOP Loves War, which consumes money for social programs, creates jobs, stimulates the economy - very Keynsian actually.
@Dwarf Planet is right on target.
Afghanistan is the key to GOP Voters, Money, Power.
But Obama should have pulled out immediately after killing bin Laden. He would have, but the GOP (McCain) Military-Defense Industry overwhelmed Obama.
2
@George Jackson , the buck stops with the President, as Harry Truman said. If anyone overwhelmed Obama, it is because he let them do so. It was his call to make as Commander-in-Chief and it is arguably the primary reason he was elected to begin with. But he chose to betray his own voters and thus help contribute to the Democratic Party's loss in 2016. If they couldn't trust the supposedly anti-war candidate to do anything about it and actually withdraw and deliver on his promises, there was no way the voters were going to trust a more hawkish candidate like Hillary Clinton.
1
Unfortunately in this modern war we are paying a lot heavily in coin, that this war was a futile attempt was very apparent the first day we got there.
Just look at history and every conqueror has come to a grinding halt in this vicinity. Nobody truly ruled them. I don't think George Bush knew anything about history he was out to destroy any country not Saudi Arabia.
Someday, our kids will pay for this folly.
As in Iraq, we have blundered into a situation where the old warning “you break it, you own it” has kept us engaged for far too long. We go in with what appear to be good intentions, but good intentions mean nothing in the world of warfare. At this point, the only reason we may still justify being in Afghanistan is to fight for the welfare of the women and children. The Taliban are religious fascists. If we allow the Taliban to “win” a role in governing Afghanistan, they will continue to force women to live limited lives in fear and subjugation. Children will be discouraged from learning most anything except the Koran and how to fight and hate. So the real question is whether it is America’s duty and/or in our vital interest to liberate Afghanistan from religious-based fascism, or alternatively support the tradition of corruption and baksheesh as the primary way of getting things done. In other words, we are once again in the middle of a foreign civil war in which neither side looks good and pulling out looks bad.
1
The "endless wars" are primarily the result of shifting to an all-volunteer military. With no skin in the game for most people, particularly the economically more advantaged, it simmers on the back burner. With so much focus on domestic travails, what happens "over there" only merits attention if there is significant violence enough to draw a few seconds worth of soundbite attention. Then it fades again. But not for the families of the maimed or dead, on both sides who have to live with, or have had their life ended in the ongoing scam that enriches the military-industrial complex more than anyone else.
Want to end the endless wars? Bring back the draft for all citizens in either the form of military, or if unable to qualify, compulsory civilian service. That might help break the many levels of polarization in the country by putting people of various backgrounds together, as well as to remember that war does come at a terrible cost.
8
One major difference between the Pentagon Papers and the Afghanistan Papers is the lack of a draft. The death toll from Afghanistan though terrible is not as terrible as the death toll from Vietnam. The impact of the lies, manipulation, and deceit is less widely felt for those reasons. We are also as you point out, in a deeply cynical age, and young people, more prone to protests than oldsters, are poorer and less hopeful about their futures than many in the 60's.
4
The basic problem here is the ethnocentrism of the US culture that tries to remake other countries in its own image. We need more sensitivity to the actual cultures of other countries rather than the gung-ho, "mission accomplished" culture of the military we send to these places. We have enough trouble getting our own house in order. That should be a clue as to the reasonableness of any expectation of changing other societies.
2
Losing the Vietnam War at the very time a war for the American soul was being fought at home meant that perceptions of our inability to win a war became tied directly to our sin of having allowed slavery. Our domestic sin became linked to the idea that we also sinned in foreign policy. Somehow the emotions stirred by domestic struggles were confirmed by the loss in the War.
Had the US won in Vietnam we would not have linked the two and we would not have fallen into the trap of believing that our sins at home, if any, meant that we could/ should not succeed in foreign wars and should not wage them.
We must hope that a repeat it can be avoided by the strategy of not losing in Afghanistan. Not "winning" is to be preferred to losing.
1
The US hasn't "won" a war since WWII (which was won with massive assistance from the other Allies) -- unless, I suppose, you want to count Grenada as a victory.
Forget "not losing" in Afghanistan. We've already lost, there was never any hope of "winning." The Taliban, the northern warlords, the cross-border factions with bases in Pakistan, the various schemers and the people at large have always known that they will still be there when we are gone. That's the reality that will result in the inevitable failure of this misguided misadventure, as it does in virtually every war by outsiders against indigenous guerrillas.
3
Douthat talks about the quagmire in Afghanistan. But there are similar quagmires in lots of places around the globe. Syria and Iraq come to mind. Then there is Yemen and the Sudan.
Some quagmires are ignored by the NY Times and the other US media. How many Americans are aware that 5.4 million lives were lost in the Second Congolese War a couple of decades ago. And residual violence still festers there.
There is periodic fighting between Pakistan and India, based in part on different religions, and both these countries have nuclear weapons.
I compare this with predictions of the IPCC of 2014: Average temperatures on planet earth are expected to rise 3.7 to 4.8 degrees centigrade by 2100. The hotter temperatures are likely to make parts of the tropics uninhabitable for humans during parts of the year. How will this affect the various quagmires around the world?
Rome had its quagmires. In my first two years of high school I was taught basic Latin via Caesar's Gallic Wars. The translations unfolded so slowly that the violence of those wars never sunk in. The Gallic chief Vercingetorix was paraded through the streets of Rome and executed. But the quagmires Rome confronted lasted for another 500 years until Rome finally fell in 476.
But of course war brutalizes, and Caesar was familiar with the person who became Emperor, Augustus.
The inability of the media to get the truth out there may be contributing to a similar landmark in our fall---the rise of Trump.
1
Our goal should be to eliminate war anywhere we can, and I believe we mostly do that as official policy. However, if the goal is to reduce American deaths, both military and civilian, then sometimes police actions, like Afghanistan, Korea and Syria are inevitable.
Almost 3000 died on 9/11. About 2400 American service men and women have died during the Afghanistan war. So the tally of lives on the ledger for this action is not clear.
Douthat makes a point worth considering. Perhaps the transition to making war obsolete is a long series of police actions where costs are minimized in the name of the best peace we can win under the circumstances.
1
Learned to live with endless wars, or just suffered the consequences of an out of control federal government that cares nothing about its people, about foreigners, about war or about deficit spending.
We should have gotten out of Afghanistan as soon as Al Queda was marginalized
There's a pretty good chance that Afghanistan will be there just like it is today, centuries from now. America, not so much.
86
Let's face it, the Republican Party learned two big lessons from the disaster of Vietnam. How to fabricate a War for their own financial and political gains and how to not let the public cry out in pain, no draft. Less than 10% of the population is in uniform. The Generals embarrassment is not ours but our dead sons and daughters funerals still do not awake us. We have been complacent with many blows to our way of life: corrupt politicians who blatantly say what they've done since they can be pardoned; a deficit so large we can't fathom how we will pay for it; two Wars that seem endless but happy it is over there not on our shores; splitting the middle class into two fractions-the working poor and the working affluent; enriching the 1%; corporations stifling wages and finally the worst, living with the lies because they have yet to harm the majority of us. The last one will soon bite us where it hurts. The Washington Post has just begun to scratch the surface of the truth.
We have been complicit to crimes against humanity by allowing our leaders to use Drones to kill the enemy and placing children in cages. And by not asking, where is the money found in Iraq and sent to Iraq and what did the Republican Party do with it? This is why we cannot face the mirror nor point the finger, the GOP strategy is working, make us part of their wrongdoing and our guilt will not ask for the truth.
@amrcitizen16 , it is not a Republican Party or Democratic Party thing but a bipartisan tragedy. Last I checked, Democrat Lyndon Johnson led the vast expansion of the Vietnam War; and Democrats Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, etc. voted in favor of Iraq, providing Bush-Cheney with prominent bipartisan cover. Democrats, who we worked so hard on behalf of back in 2005 and 2006 so they would regain control of Congress, then refused to impeach Bush-Cheney after winning back control in '06. And Democrats Obama-Biden ran against the wars in 2008 and then continued them their entire 8 years! Some troop reductions in Iraq at one point, yes, only to be followed by more increases and air attacks. Not to mention Democratic Party expansion of the neo-con, intervention-first regime change nonsense to Syria, Libya, Ukraine, Yemen, etc.
No wonder so many voters ultimately throw up their hands and say it doesn't matter which party you vote for. On this issue, at least, probably the most important issue there is, there seems to be virtually zero difference between the parties.
The parallels between Vietnam and this never ending war in the Middle East are clear. We went into both wars with a failure to understand the culture and tribalism of the countries involved, and hubris in overestimating our military ability to engage in guerrilla warfare. If we had a military draft people would take to the streets to end this. We are still in a"Fog of War" where there is an acceptable number of casualties that will keep the public at bay. Lives are just figures on a piece of paper.
This war is like a chronic infection we can't rid ourselves of. Always there and ready to flare up.
Before we went to war in Afghanistan, Middle East experts warned of how this would go, and no one listened and no one wanted to listen. The public were told it was because of 9/11, the real reason was business. Oil and mineral deposits were the prize. Spreading democracy was the lip service given at first to spreading the war further, then it became evident that the corruption could not be overcome, nor could religious zealots willing to engage in egregious acts in the name of what they see as holy. Now untold loss of life and our treasure continue unabated.
The Washington Post held up a mirror and instead of what we think we look like, we saw the reflection of a Dorian Gray.
What happens if we walk away like we did in Vietnam? Embarrassment? How much more can we be embarrassed before the world than we are right now?
End the bloody war. Enough!
The immense power of the military-industrial complex (remember Eisenhower?) cannot be underestimated. Fabricating wars, and then finding reasons to perpetuate 'a la Afghanistan' seems perverse but may be just "business as usual"...if it weren't so catastrophic in blood and treasure...and the opportunistic birth of radical, even fanatically, religious groups, trying to impose themselves while fighting our incursions in their territory. As if Vietnam were forgotten, Santayana had a point: "those that forgot the past may be condemned to repeat it".
Please take into consideration that we have an all-volunteer military and it's just seen as their job to engage in warfare, like autoworkers on the factory floor. We also stalemated in the 1950s Korean conflict with its endless repercussions now. People are so oblivious because they can be and are content with their devices, social media, and pay-for and reality TV to distract them, so they don't care. The American public is asleep while woke.
1
Not a bad analysis. But it does miss one big aspect that may or may have been decisive lo these 18 years, but in any case certainly wasn't at play in 1971:
From the very beginning of the Afghan conflict, "Support The Troops" was established as a kind of magic incantation that conferred instant credibility on whoever says it, and irreparable shame on anyone who didn't just nod their heads.
Never mind what "supporting the troops" actually meant in practice (it certainly didn't mean, for instance, actually taking care of wounded veterans!) The Troops became an abstraction with which no decent person could argue. The Troops wanted whatever the speaker needed them to want.
So Troopism became a cudgel with which to beat anyone who questioned the value of ongoing military intervention (however unclear the strategy or endgame) or appropriations for military hardware (however irrelevant to the well-being and success of actual soldiers in actual war) or, really, any policy (tax cuts, mass surveillance, extraordinary rendition and official torture programs) that could semi-plausibly be tied in some fashion to soldiering, kind of, if you squint.
This wasn't the case in 1971. However inappropriate some of the anti-military sentiment at the time, people still retained the right to question in polite company the U.S.' military policies. But in 2001, Americans denied themselves the right to even discuss the value of military intervention. Small wonder, then, that it went on for so long.
1
So, is 1.5 Trillion down the drain and thousands of Americans dead and wounded worth a "stalemate"?
Can we look at a "stalemate" as a win of sorts if viewed in terms of the potential outcome had we done nothing at all?
By any paper metric, this war is/was an unmitigated catastrophe, as was Vietnam.
However, we are perpetually drawn into conflicts such as these, despite the dreadful, inevitable statistical outcome.
Is it simply to demonstrate that we are still the toughest guy on the block? If so, is that important for our national security?
If you are uncomfortable with the answer, then maybe the lies make a little bit more sense now.
Reading my favorite sleuth, Sherlock Holmes, I noticed that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle introduced the fictional detective’s alter ego, Dr. Watson, as a wounded veteran of the British war in Afghanistan.
That was in eighteenth eighty-six, yes one hundred thirty three years ago. Why should I be surprised if that country is still at war? It is obvious that evolution has allowed them the opportunity to survive as long as they are fighting whoever the enemy is. That we are continuing that saga under a new fiction should make us pause.
1
the reason the majority of the British troops in India were stationed on the North West Frontier, what is now Pzkistan, was to keep the Afghans out of India. the feeling was mutual as the Afghans would fight to the last man to keep out foreigners.
Truth in Taxation would tell people how much of the Federal Income/Excise tax of every paycheck and purchase (gasoline, booze, etc) was going to key budgetary items, meaning the DOD budget and Social services. Call out War Expense, too, and citizens can make informed decisions. (Computers were invented to do the math easily and quickly.)
Now the Govt & Mil/Ind Complex wish to keep it functionally a secret.
Wonderful reporting -- Craig Whitlock is a hero. HOWEVER -- the main point is being missed: this is a story of war profiteering. That Trillion Dollars went into the defense industry and contractors who built infrastructure in Afghanistan that for some reason Congress didn't see fit to build in America. The momentum, the answer to "Why didn't they just stop?" is much more about the flow of taxpayer money than it is about politics or helping a foreign country. It's easy to dismiss this debacle as "madness," but it isn't madness at all. It's greed.
4
jimbob, you preempted what I planned to say. people die because bullets must be produced. im sick of it. planning to go get Ken follet's "lie down with lions". we basically went to war to impede Russia. my local library has it. I read ityears ago and then gave my copy away. must reread
Regarding Douthat's comment that "... Afghanistan may yet prove that given an all-volunteer military, the right amount of cynical detachment at home and a low enough casualty rate in the theater itself, Americans will accept a war where there is no prospect for victory, and no clear objective save the permanent postponement of defeat", there also needs to be cynical detachment from the notion of an "all-volunteer military".
A significant number of military personnel are not necessarily volunteers. Rather, they are recruited. According to the U.S. Army Recruiting Command, " There are about than 9,500 Soldiers and civilian recruiters working out of more than 1,400 recruiting stations across the United States and overseas", and there are established recruiting goals (number of recruits). For FY 2020, the Army's recruiting goal is over 68,000.
Although many individuals while still in high school actively look forward to enlisting, a great many are not. That is the purpose of recruiting, to cultivate interest among youth in signing up, who may still be searching for career opportunities or just "something to do" for a couple of years. That's not a bad thing at all and, ultimately, signing on the dotted line as a discretionary action can be construed as "volunteering". However, without getting too wrapped up in semantics, if there were sufficient true volunteers standing in the enlistment line, the Army, and the other services, would not have to set recruiting goals.
I spent lots of time over the past 25 years reviewing & assessing US and coalition "stability operations" in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other parts of the world for Congress, and I can affirm that the attitudes of misplaced optimism (at best) and self-delusion (at worst) that the author notes has been exhibited by US leadership in Afghanistan is a phenomenon shared by their counterparts in all of these missions. I think it is a character prerequisite for being able to function in these situations. We used to joke about the "Balkan optimists" found in the international community trying to restore some sense of stability in that region: these were the officials one initially met in Sarajevo in the mid-1990s complaining about how bad conditions were there and how hopeless their tasks were; but they were still there years later complaining about the same thing.
Also, I have met a number of English officials over the years who dismissed our concerns about the seemingly hopeless struggle we face in Afghanistan. Some would archly congratulate the US for only taking 18 years and 4,000 lives lost to reach the same conclusion that it took the British Empire three Afghan wars spread over 80 years (including the complete massacre of their first 14,000-strong occupation army in 1842) to realize: Afghanistan may not be quite worth the effort after all. The irony is they told this to me from locations in Afghanistan, where Brits are still fighting (and dying) to this day.
I have never understood what is so compelling for the U.S. national security interest that we are fighting a war in Afghanistan, a country on the other side of the planet. It's pretty clear now that the U.S. commitment of blood and treasure has been a total waste of lives and money.
This war, like military engagements in Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Pakistan and other countries has only benefited arms manufacturers, flag-waving politicians and military officers. U.S. Army generals can earn six-figure fees speaking at hedge fund conferences and lead courses on "leadership" at Harvard Business School.
It's the "sunk cost fallacy," where once started, politicians and military officers continue since so much has been invested already. Besides, what's an army general to do if he doesn't have a war to go to when he gets up in the morning?
3
Afghanistan may be the graveyard of empires, but it is merely the latest gold mine for the merchants of war. Forever wars are the revenue source for them. After they are done with Afghanistan, it will be on to new revenue source. Does not matter who or even whether anyone "wins" these conflicts. Ike knew what he was talking about.
1
Donald Rumsfeld defined the police-action, small-bore type of conflict and pushed the military (kicking and screaming the whole way) to implement the strategy. As with the British Empire, we can probably live with small investments/low casualty conflicts indefinitely...Assuming we don't run into bigger problems with the PRC. And the military will continue to bad mouth it all the way.
There is certainly nothing inherently wrong with an "endless war" the objective of which is to prevent further mass casualty terrorist attacks on Americans and the West. It may well be that this will require military and intelligence deployments in or near more than a dozen locations around the globe indefinitely. But we need to be clear and focused about such a strategy, which entails small numbers of specialized troops, major intelligence resources, and close relationships with allies.
A factor that isn’t discussed in Douthat’s insightful article is the role played by the most obvious “winners”, the Military Industrial Complex. What role do they and their army of highly paid lobbyists and connected insiders play in influencing and obfuscating the decisions described in The Post’s excellent reporting that have prolonged this debacle in Afghanistan not to mention the disaster of Iraq.
3
The greatest moment of the democratic debates so far was the brief exchange over our military interventionism between Tulsi Gabbard and Pete Buttigeig. Mayor Pete offered a brilliantly articulated and emotionally charged defense of our military commitments, our honor, our honesty, etc.. These are the SAME powerful and very misleading arguments that kept us in Viet Nam so long. These arguments keep us entrenched in military affairs that offer only financial and political dividends for a select few, but result in the killing of their soldiers, their civilians and our soldiers, in that order. We need politicians like Tulsi (and Bernie) who don't just pretend to have courage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdYu2yXpmqo
1
I should add, this whole debate discussion would never have occurred if they didn't go off the moderators' script.
It has become clear that American taxpayers do not have the time or energy to expend on changing government policy or to hold officials accountable.
American taxpayers spent 2 trillion dollars on the war in Afghanistan and has nothing to show for it. President Eisenhower warned us about where we were headed with this slavish devotion to the military-industrial complex. In his Iron Cross Speech, Eisenhower made comparisons between the cost of munitions and how that money could be spent more productively building schools, hospitals, highways, and other public works projects. In short, building a better, stronger America.
“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.”
Americans should be outraged by this waste of money and lives. But we aren’t. There are a few voices who shout into the wind but sadly they are usually mocked and often ignored. Our health care system is broken, our mass transportation systems are crumbling, and public education has lost its way.
America has the potential to realign its values, but does it have the will power to accomplish those things? Every Empire in history has had its rise and fall. What is amazing to me is how quickly America is descending into the abyss because of our failure to hold our elected representatives accountable for fighting these endless wars.
2
With respect to the official lies about Afghanistan, I am reminded of what a senior military officer told a junior officer when they were passing the offices of generals and admirals in the Pentagon:
"Never doubt for a minute that any of these officers would give their lives for their country, and never doubt for a minute that they would compromise their principles to keep their stars."
I believe Afghanistan is unsalvageable when viewing it from the eyes of a democracy. It will never happen in the near future, this aspired peace, security, and justice toward its citizens. We are faced with a moral dilemma. Should we stay there indefinitely, protecting it from the Taliban and like terrorists groups as well as internal corruption, while risking our own troops in a war that we are destined to lose? Or should we walk away and accept that which is difficult to accept? The fate of this backward nation will not be that of Viet Nam’s. In hindsight, we were correct in leaving. This southeast Asian nation not only survived but managed to bring on progress in spite of its Communist leadership. Not so with the roiling unrest of Afghanistan. That being said, I still yearn for the day when we can extricate ourselves from the entire Middle East. I am tired and weary.
4
Congress is on a different level of thought. They go to committee meeting and sit in on seminars and councils and hear stories from military equipment contractors that so much tax payer money can be saved by providing consistent support over long periods of time. They here how Russia is developing hypersonic missiles and China developing cyber or robotics or space warfare and they feel left behind and feel the need to be leaders.
Again it is our guilt that is causing us to loose our backbone. We think we by having a strong military we are leading the free world into prosperity. We are really taking our cues from other countries nefarious invasive futuristic warfare schemes and making them reality by joining into the race. Instead we should take a strong anti tech war stance and show leadership. Introducing new technologies into warfare is edging us closer and closer to doomsday.
1
I was barely aware that this foreign military conflict was still happening -- and I read newspapers most every day ! A "quiet" war, but we've spent over $1T on it.
1
A DRAFT WON'T HELP ANYTHING!
Almost a third of US soldiers' deaths in Vietnam were draftees.
EVEN WITH A DRAFT, THE AMERICAN VIETNAM WAR KILLED OVER 58,000 US TROOPS, AND WOUNDED OVER 300,000.
The war was a long one: US military assistance began in 1955 and the first US soldiers were killed in 1959. The war didn't end until 1975, and the draft had only ended two years earlier. If anybody thinks that this is an attractive advertisement for re-instituting the draft, they should really think again.
Somehow this reminds me of the bail outs of the financial industry in Europe and here at home. Everything is structured so that no policy maker should lose face and no investor should lose the nominal value of his assets.
"It frustrates popular opposition by never supplying a strong reason — whether in mass casualties or clear military defeats — for antiwar sentiment to leave the rightward and leftward fringes and become a major popular concern."
Oh, I can think of 2 Trillion strong reasons for anti-war sentiment to become a major popular concern.
2
I remember reading one author's account of Soviet cynicism. He suggested that many didn't trust their government, but they were also convinced all governments lie to their citizens.
Add in the small percentage of those serving and, it's easy to foster complacency and indifference.
1
By 1972 we and our South Vietnamese allies had won the Vietnam War. We finally learned how to do counter-insurgency and the NVA had been broken in the Tet Offensive, misrepresented to the American public as an American defeat but in fact a defensive victory.
Then in 1975 the North Vietnamese invaded and we would not even send ammunition to the South Vietnamese, throwing away the fruits of our victory, and subjecting then to (so far) 44 years of tyranny.
@Jonathan Katz
What a fantastic distortion of history...thanks for that Jonathan, keep them coming!!!!!
This opinion piece obfuscates the real issues. The so-called “war” in Afghanistan was started by George Bush ostensibly because Afghanistan did not “hand over” Osama Bin Ladin to the United States. So, because our demand to hand over a suspected terrorist was not satisfied, the US invaded the country of Afghanistan and bombed and destroyed much of the country, including tens of thousands of Afghans, including innocent civilians, many children and babies included. This was totally unjustified and a clear war crime. The US wants Russia to extradite Edward Snowden and “hand him over” to the US. Russia has refused to do that. So would we be justified in invading and bombing Russia? Or would we have been justified in invading and bombing Ecuador for allowing Julian Assange asylum in their embassy in Great Britain? Obviously, the answer is “no”. But we invaded Afghanistan on the same basis. Or perhaps for other undisclosed reasons. We now know that the highest officials in the Bush Administration lied to us about getting into the war and continued to lie to us about the war (as they did in the Iraq war). Then the Bush, Obama and Trump administrations continued to lie to us about the war. They wasted trillions of our tax dollars and sacrificed tens of thousands of lives. This is one of the greatest war crimes against humanity in all of history. That is what people should know and should be up in arms about.
@Deep Integrity
Afghanistan was willing to hand over binLaden if the US provided proof of his involvement in 9/11
Instead, we invaded.
Gee. Where did all this anti-government sentiment originate? Well, some of it is a function of conservatives who told half-truths about the pie. They let the meme of 'those losers are robbing your tax money', instead of clearly saying that all tax law is meant to give biz a free rein to do what ever they wanted to do. But what the theorists on the right where wrong about is Joe-Six-Pack; they saw through this lie. What RD and all of his tribe missed was the protest which became the Protestant faith, which said that the priest class, the monastics, can not parse the data for us, we will do so on our own estimation of what is true and good, and what is not; we will decide when murder is really just murder, or when it is a just war. People just are not willing to wallow in this mess anymore. RD and crew need to come to terms, which they have not as yet, with how they failed the base. Where were the the right wing theorists when Crush Dimbaugh and Trump were spewing the myths about Obama? Why did they not speak up against this? Did you think these lies were okay because they would get you an electoral victory? Well now you are dealing with the base of Trump who do not care about lying. When will the conservatives own this?
Once congress gave up its duty to declare wars and control our choices it has been a disaster. The allowing the President and his people to choose and control with no balances results in inadequate representative actions.
The next level is the lobby and money power of defense industry, The more wars and the bigger the better.
A trillion dollars !! Wow what a deal. As many in Afghanistan said" so much money.coming so fast"!Our congress takes an hour to grant 50 billion for a war but a year to argue about 300 million for food stamps.
1
All very nice comments - from afar.
Here, on the ground, personally 10 years in, a different take.
Yes, billions wasted in past and thousands killed and wounded. Far worse, the latter, that's for sure.
But now, acceptable, from a strategic perspective. The current posture is correct and sustainable. Pulling out completely would waste everything that's been put in.
My 2 Afs worth...
41
@Congo Chris: So it's all right if we stay there another 18 years and blow off another trillions of dollars trying to make a silk purse out of a sows ear ?
There is no win in Afghanistan,
29
@Congo Chris I really appreciate your perspective. We need to hear more from people on the ground in Afghanistan. But you say “Pulling out completely would waste everything that's been put in.” That’s sadly true. But sunk costs can blind us to reality. How will more blood and treasure will change the situation there?
87
@Congo Chris Appreciate the local perspective, but the fundamental problem is that the lives lost and money spent has been a waste. There is no victory to be had. A peace agreement with the Taliban means nothing once the US leaves and 5 years after I would not be surprised if the Taliban weren't back in power. That isn't going to change with another 10 years of US engagement, the outcome will still be the same.
It's terrible that has happened and nobody wants to tell someone who has lost loved ones that their lives were wasted, but that's the truth. Lives have been wasted horribly. Let's not waste any more.
21
Ross; our nation is the Biblical Beast. The two horns were Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the ten horns all around is the Pentagon, and eyes all around is their Television industry. I advise everyone who understands to accept that and find new lands in the Southern Hemisphere to live peacefully.
We have been lied to in all our recent wars, from Korea, throughout the Vietnam war and even now all these lies permeate the many middle east conflicts.....where our soldiers have been sacrificed for the military complex.
In WW2 we were told almost nothing at all, save our victories. We have indeed learned to live with endless lies from both parties. Ringing in my ears is the modified karaoake song, "What I Did for War."
1
Support our troops. Bring them all home.
The NYT reported in 2010 that Afghanistan contained nearly 1 trillion dollars in huge mineral deposits critical to industry.
A Pentagon memo cited in the article described Afghanistan as possibly becoming the "Saudi Arabia of lithium".
Here;
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/world/asia/14minerals.html
I wonder how many deals took place with mining interests during the war while our taxes were pouring into the Afghan economy.
While our soldiers were put in harms way.
Will the American taxpayers receive complimentary lithium ion batteries for our Chinese made cell phones?
It always comes back to the money.
And many of the people who sustained this war are now foisting an unhinged president on the American people because he is "good for business".
And they may succeed.
1
We – “The West” – somehow live in the illusion of having a free will. It is in the genetics of the Anglo-Saxon /American tribe that we should fight for “freedom, democracy/human rights – by guns . The British colonial desire to dominate the world – has a follow up by the Americans after WWII. As Schopenhauer noticed: “A man can do what he will, but nor will what he will”. So I agree “rhe West” will stay in Afghanistan, and Iraq, Syria and Saudi and keep Abraham Lincoln” in the Gulf forever – without that will chane any soul in other tribes - equally legitimate - in their genetically differences from us. The Chinese are different – not created equal, nor – by their creator given rights other parts of nature are deprived of. As said by an African journalist in a BBC program: yes the Chinese also want to dominate us, but they do not use guns, and we prefer they otherwise let us live best we can.
Truth does not get anyone free. Truth is all about courage.
And the author thinks a military draft would have changed this?
@Dan Of course it would have. If the average person with a yellow-ribbon magnet on their SUV in 2001 had had skin in the game, the Afghan War would have been a short military bombing run, and the Iraq War would never have happened.
Drafts force people to think of war in realistic, personal terms, rather than as something other people are involved in.
Personally, I'd like to see a law forcing a draft for any US military engagement lasting over 90-days. If we care enough to spend a trillion dollars and tens/hundreds of thousands of innocent civilian lives, we should care enough to send our children to die as well.
1
I was drafter in 1970. After already a few years of anti-war activism, I refused of course.
The pentagon papers were a huge contribution to the end of the way - proving to everyday Americans just what we had been saying for years- the gov't was bald faced lying to us.
And here we are again.
It does not take a rocket scientist to see the idiocy of our Afghanistan actions - $2 TRILLION - and almost NOTHING accomplished that a few well placed bombs shortly after 9/11 could not have done.
The idiocy of using corrupt local puppet regimes as a front for our "nation building" fantasies has not been learned, and probably never will be.
Pathetic deja vu all over again.
As with the Vietnam war I feel most sorry for our service people, who sign away their constitutional rights and are then made cannon fodder...
2
There is a reason why they call Afghanistan the "Grave Yard of Empires."
Perhaps it would have been better for us if we had left this pitiful piece of real estate to the Russians. I never did see a win here, just terrible losses in lives and money.
We need to change the military to a tree planting corps, or we'll all perish.
1
Ross,
" Americans will accept a war where there is no prospect for victory, and no clear objective save the permanent postponement of defeat. "
In fact, Ross, there is a clear objective and that was establishede when Bush turned on the deficit spending to begin destroying Afghanistan and Afghani lives.
That objective: Military Contractor Profit, and the enrichment of special people and companies, like the former Blackwater "security services company".
The number of people who have enriched themselves on the various Middle East killing escapades, by the US, under the guise of, "fighting terrorism" is astronomical.
If you can just get one contract there and send some folks over to show that you can collect the money, it means millions of dollars. Sometimes billions and billions.
Bush established the whole scenario by introducing "no bid" contracts for military contractors.
Just submit the bill for your services or product or for nothing and the US gov will borrow to pay you handsomely.
If you do not realize that Military Contractor enrichment is the reason we are there, and, also, one reason why much of America is silent (they WORK at those places).....then....you have not been reading your own newspaper very well for the last 20 years.
Money. Killing brown people in Afghanistan is huge money, and, folks here don't care because their son is not getting shot over their against his will by the locally born sons of the folks we started shooting 20 years ago.
1
Let us now praise New Hamshire's Senator Bob Smith for his role in miring us in this debacle. The logic was pure. We'd send missiles to the Taliban so they could waste the Russians...never mind that those same missiles would one day be directed at us. He was indefatigable in his efforts. In fact, it's about the only issue that marked his tenure...like a stain. We all owe him a debt of a trillion or two.
We keep rolling out new generations of fancier toys that make war look more exciting and reasonable. And then we find out it comes down to ugly hand to hand fights.
We need a massive nuclear deterrent to stop true existential threats and a reasonable conventional military to fight in an alliance.
Too much money is involved to ever let this happen. Our country is too dependent on massive military spending to goose the economy (as Republicans do whenever in power) and to support high tech supremacy to ever let the stupidity go.
But maybe we could once again put far greater constraints in Presidential power to take us to war.
But of course conservatives would oppose this. We MUST conserve perceived military dominance even if we cannot win a war. Blah blah blah Mr Douthat
When a nation begins with lies it must be sustained by lies and ultimately be ended by their pathological effects.
When have Americans not preferred lies?
Never.
This is who we are.
So long as most Americans continue relying on corporate media for their (mis)understanding of world events, they’ll never know anything about the warmongering imperialism that defines this country to the rest of the world.
Goebbels could never have designed a more effective propaganda system than what now dominates the capitalist imperialist narrative in the US. From Sean Hannity to Rachel Maddow, Americans are successfully brainwashed every day. We might be in Afghanistan another 20 years and most Americans still won’t have clue.
The USA... where our soldiers commit suicide more often than they die at the hands of the enemy.
The USA... where our cops commit suicide more often than they die in the line of duty.
None of the official explanations come anywhere close to this:
Maybe killing for pay so that rich people can have all the stuff at home and abroad isn't all that easy for your average person to live with?
A sly bit of Obama bashing, just couldn’t help yourself. Otherwise, some good points. The best way to prevent useless, unending
“ War “ is to reinstate the Draft. For ALL able-bodied 18 year olds, Male and Female. NO student deferments, no bogus
Medical Exemptions, i.e. Bone Spurs, no excuses. Imagine the Horror, when middle class white Kids are at risk.
Seriously.
It's strange that so many Americans push back against the idea of higher taxes on the rich to pay for universal health care, affordable college and student loan forgiveness, and affordable child care, but completely ignore the trillions of dollars wasted in wars. If we cut the military budget by just about 12%, we could pay for everyone going to college. That would have a profound, positive effect on millions of lives and our economy. We are way past due for a major restructuring of our government, but first we need to fight the propaganda that bamboozles millions of Americans.
3
Americans are a frightened people. They are easily scared into war fought by our all-volunteer military against whatever boogey man the military-industrial complex points to. Couple that with the many businesses and politicians who benefit from war and you get a combination that can only lead one way--over and over again.
Heck, even the soviets gave up and left Afghanistan. We should have learned that lesson quickly. Instead, we divided our troops so we could go after that "hot bed" of Al Qaeda, Iraq.
The thinking is that the well-being and readiness of our military-industrial complex requires us to maintain a continuing engagement in 'real battle'. Afghanistan provides this opportunity for the US. There is a price to be paid, and the goal is to get that cost down to an acceptable level to support the overall objective.
President Lyndon Johnson told Defense Sec'y McNamara that he knew the war in Viet Nam was unwinnable but that he would continue it anyway so losing a war would not be on his watch. Thousands more died while the President gave false reports of strong progress in winning the war.
"Where have all the flowers gone...…..gone to graveyards everywhere, when will we ever learn ? " The Kingston Trio in the'60s.
1
@Frank Heneghan
It's simple;
"West-More-Land".
No big deal. We have had troops in the Philippines since 1898 and no one cares.
1
American believed it could succeed were the Brits and Russian failed. From 200
"Pushtunwali's principles have not changed in centuries—certainly not since they were recorded by Victorian ethnographers,
“Any man who loses his honour must be completely ostracised,” said Sandaygul, “No one would congratulate him on the birth of child. No one would marry his daughter. No one would attend his funeral. His disgrace will endure for generations. He and his family must move away.” In Pushtu, to be disgraced means literally to be an outsider.
The Insulting Americans
There are infinite ways to slight a Pushtun's nang, but most involve zar, zan or zamin: gold, women or land. The search tactics of American troops in Afghanistan, five years after they invaded the country, tend to offend on all counts. By forcing entry into the mud-fortress home of a Pushtun, with its lofty buttresses and loopholes, they dishonour his property. By stomping through its female quarters, they dishonour his women. Worse, the search may end with the householder handcuffed and dragged off before his neighbours: his person disgraced"
His honour besmirched—and here's the problem for the Americans—a Pushtun is obliged to have his revenge, or badal. "
The Economist, 12/19/2006
The folly believe that we could change a centuries old culture cost us $ 2 Trillions and 2,372 dead soldiers
The header reads: Lies Have Kept Us in Afghanistan. But the Truth May Not Set Us Free.
Probably “may” implying “permission” was chosen purposely instead of “might” implying “possibility”. The possibility that truth might triumph is naysayed by our history. And truth is much harder to get these days amidst a deluge of propaganda and denial of facts.
1
Has America won any war, any war at all, since WWII? Is it that our military "planners" (for want of a better word) are incompetent? Or too focused on feathering their nests?
But RD, you came out of the rightwing, birthed from National Review as I recall...isn't that correct what did you say when these policies were conceived, promoted, embedded starting with the neocons and the National Review.
I don't remember you joining us in shouting -- "This is Stupid!"
Please reveal where you were then? Are you burning your uniform and joining us, what is your legitimacy to wag your finger now?
As I do recall, there was a publisher sort of at the National Review who denounced the Neo-cons and Israel's dominance in Middle East decision making, but I think he was accused of anti-Semitism, marginalized and shunted to the side.
But I know there were some on the right against our Iraq and Afghanistan initiatives, were you one of them?
My conscience is clear.
In my personal studies of history, now 65 years on, I've found there were always people who got it right, like on our tragic policies toward Indians and buffalo...
But they were always outnumbered and overwhelmed.
Which side were you on? Please write a column on that.
4
I was in the middle of Basic Training at Fort Ord when the Pentagon Papers were published months, later I was in Vietnam the last years of the war.
For years the search for an honorable face saving exit quite a few casualties in those years. The withdrawal took place fully Jan 1973 leaving divisions of NVA in South Vietnam two years later it all collapsed in chaos.
Today the Taliban are the NVA we can only kid ourselves that a stable situation can be negotiated Kabul will fall like Saigon. Time to just leave with a speedy but organized exit.
1
Historians and analysts have failed to comprehend how destruction by war impacts different cultures. What we call "victory," a clearcut end to armed conflict, essentially demands capitulation by an entire population. The surrender endpoint comes from a state of exhaustion when a nation's population seeks to restore something resembling pre-conflict living conditions. In 1945, for example, the German populace had seen its nation's productivity devastated with starvation looming. Nazi appeals to continue the fight as a guerrilla conflict fell on the deaf ears of people with a living memory of vastly better living conditions. Their fall from grace was stark and compelling, and motivated a desire to return to a peaceful past at any cost.
Contrast this to third-world nations where the decline in living conditions induced by warfare is not so pronounced and the populations, unaccustomed to the wealth and comforts of western nations, are more inured to hardship. Sadly, these are the circumstances that allow armed conflict to drag on interminably, as witness the chronic internecine "civil wars" that infect too many parts of the third world. Much the same applied to pre-industrial Europe, when wars were frequent and often of long duration.
Military "solutions" cannot be expected to produce the same outcomes in such varied environments.
"The Afghanistan revelations, on the other hand, arrive in an America already so distrustful that it’s hard to imagine how it could be disillusioned further.
The quote below doesn't give me much hope and opens the door
to even deeper disillusionment.
The following question was asked of Geroge H.W. Bush in 1992 by Sarah McClendon, a White House reporter. ‘What will the people do if they ever find out the truth about Iraq-gate and Iran contra?'”
"Sarah, if the American people ever find out what we have done, they would chase us down the street and lynch us."
We've pretty much swept that series event under history's rug but the implications are still pretty horrid.
I suspect George W. Bush could top his father but the media is too busy helping with his 'rehabilitation' instead of looking into the events that got us into Afghanistan and Iraq.
1
Historians and analysts have failed to comprehend how destruction by war impacts different cultures. What we call "victory," a clearcut end to armed conflict, essentially demands capitulation by an entire population. The surrender endpoint comes from a state of exhaustion when a nation's population seeks to restore something resembling pre-conflict living conditions. In 1945, for example, the German populace had seen its nation's productivity devastated with starvation looming. Nazi appeals to continue the fight as a guerrilla conflict fell on the deaf ears of people with a living memory of vastly better living conditions. Their fall from grace was stark and compelling, and motivated a desire to return to a peaceful past at any cost.
Contrast this to third-world nations where the decline in living conditions induced by warfare is not so pronounced and the populations, unaccustomed to the wealth and comforts of western nations, are more inured to hardship. Sadly, these are the circumstances that allow armed conflict to drag on interminably, as witness the chronic internecine "civil wars" that infect too many parts of the third world. Much the same applied to pre-industrial Europe, when wars were frequent and often of long duration.
Military "solutions" cannot be expected to produce the same outcomes in such varied environments.
Historians and analysts have failed to comprehend how destruction by war impacts different cultures. What we call "victory," a clearcut end to armed conflict, essentially demands capitulation by an entire population. The surrender endpoint comes from a state of exhaustion when a nation's population seeks to restore something resembling pre-conflict living conditions. In 1945, for example, the German populace had seen its nation's productivity devastated with starvation looming. Nazi appeals to continue the fight as a guerrilla conflict fell on the deaf ears of people with a living memory of vastly better living conditions. Their fall from grace was stark and compelling, and motivated a desire to return to a peaceful past at any cost.
Contrast this to third-world nations where the decline in living conditions induced by warfare is not so pronounced and the populations, unaccustomed to the wealth and comforts of western nations, are more inured to hardship. Sadly, these are the circumstances that allow armed conflict to drag on interminably, as witness the chronic internecine "civil wars" that infect too many parts of the third world. Much the same applied to pre-industrial Europe, when wars were frequent and often of long duration.
Military "solutions" cannot be expected to produce the same outcomes in such varied environments.
This article was written as if NYT and other leaders of the mainstream press have ZERO involvement in the perpetuation of these endless wars. For access to the newsworthy information they sell (and a place at a table where nothing gets resolved) they have long since boxed our military industrial complex with kid gloves. Because of our well known long-term memory issues, NYT's occasional critical expose doesn't do much other than add profit. But what does have deeper meaning is their baseline perpetuation of the rationales for the current wars and our military interventionism, in general.
And this is more than simply embracing conventional viewpoints and perpetuating norms. Look how NYT and mainstream media go out of their to AVOID covering the one serious anti-war candidate running for president right now, Tulsi Gabbard. Anyone who is unconvinced that the media is doing a disinformation (and noninformation) service on her should watch one of her interviews/podcasts with Joe Rogan. They will see a candidate that is very different from what is portrayed by the media. (There are also similar podcasts with Bernie and Andrew Yang that are excellent.)
1
As George Orwell wrote: "War is peace". Give people a common enemy and it unites them, even a false one.
46
@David
Except we aren't united, by anything anymore. The country is either split right down the middle or completely fractured. I can't think of a single issue besides, well, I can't think of anything most people agree on now a days.
2
@Al We were united, briefly, after 9/11. Then Bush/Cheney went in to Iraq and the split began.
3
@Lew Black
True. Then instead of a call to arms we were told to go shopping. I wonder what would have happened if FDR had done that.
5
The US public has been consistently lied about an unwinnable conflict in Afghanistan. But the “truth” may not set them “free,” because truths are inconvenient.
The US should have sent more anthropologists to the region than troops, because the military knows little about the Afghan history and culture. No wonder many interviewed, said: "we didn’t know what we were doing.”
Afghanistan is notoriously difficult to conquer. It had been the venue of the Great Game between the British Empire and the Imperial Russia. Both powers sought control over Afghanistan and neighbouring territories in Central and South Asia in the 19th century.
Empire after empire, nation after nation have failed to gain a foothold in the modern territory of Afghanistan, giving the region the nickname “Graveyard of Empires. ”
If the United States and its allies decide to leave Afghanistan, they would only the latest in a long series of nations to do so. The Soviet troops left in 1989 after a decade there. The Taliban know that time is on their side.
2
Much has been said about the contrast between Pres. Trump's inexperience, unwillingness to learn, amateurism, impulsiveness, etc. in foreign policy on one hand, and the "experts'", career diplomats', and dedicated civil servants' thoughtfulness, knowledge, dedication to process, etc. on the other hand.
One has to wonder about the results, though. Pointless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which cost thousands of American and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi and Afghan lives, and trillions in treasure, and now the lies of the same experienced experts vs. the first Presidency without a war in recent memory...
4
@Henry K.
Good point. I guess that K isn't for Kissinger.
The Pax Romana was sustained by legionaries guarding the Rhine and Danube frontiers with endless "indefinite police actions". Why should we be surprised that our leaders conclude that our Pax Americana requires latter day legionaries on other frontiers fighting "indefinite police actions"? That's what we have a professional army rather than a citizen army for.
Paul Solon
There are endless enemies, and therefore there is endless war. People want to see the end of American power, from inside and from outside. It requires constant vigilance. Everyone wants to be king of the hill.
There are many potential enemies but none that have even one tenth of the resources and military spend as the USA. This massive superiority will obviously deter any serious challenge from much smaller competitors such as Russia. So much for that imperative to ever snowballing expenditure. The argument for Afghanistan presented here is that it can be a refuge for terrorists. From that point of view it would be necessary to occupy half the world. There is a momentum to ever increasing US global presence and military might. That's the real problem.
>>> "People want to see the end of American power, from inside and from outside."
Well, at least, most of the world wants to see the end of America as the world's sole hyperpower. We should want that, also. It would be better for everyone.
>>> "It requires constant vigilance. Everyone wants to be king of the hill."
Yeah, we oughtta stop wanting that.
@John Ayres I used to be a big critic of the military and counterterrorism efforts. It depends on who is in charge. It can be done well and be limited in scope, but that requires advanced technology and great human sources. Every day there are threats. It's naive to think that we can afford to isolate ourselves.
Lets be clear Washington did change for the better after the Pentagon Papers and Nixon's resignation.
The republicans worked very very hard to bring things back to what they were since then.
They succeeded.
1
Remind me, how many Democrats vote against our endless wars and aggressive foreign policy?
I hope we have at least gotten over the delusion that some new and charismatic politician or general will bring order and democracy and unicorns and puppies. That didn't happen in Vietnam and it's not going to happen in the Middle East.
Conditions there are going to get worse and may never get better. The climate crisis will make much of the region unlivable without expensive and power-hungry air conditioning. Its effect on agriculture threatens the food supply.
If the world gets off the fossil fuel teat -- we really have no choice if we want to survive -- at least our leaders won't be quite so ready to dig us in deeper in places that have oil and gas reserves. But without the income from oil and gas, the economies of the Middle East and Russia will be in deep trouble. That could lead to...
God knows what.
Any effective solutions – or at least acceptable workarounds – to our problems in Middle East or at home have to be grounded in reality. So far, our response to government by deception has been to elect a man who lies as easily as he breathes.
Trump's political success has been based on identifying people's prejudices and preconceptions and affirming them. How can a nation that wants to be lied to find it's way at home or abroad?
2
I'm skeptical of the claim that the American publc eventually grew weary of war circa 1969. I think most Americans would have supported the Vietnam war forever. I was drafted in '67 and served two years stateside and I never remember any adults including my parents "giving up" on the war. They were fine with it. I guess because it was "over there" Americans are pretty tolerant of wars occuring as long as they happen far from their neighborhood. John Poole
1
The USA, by priding itself as "the beacon of the free world", has taken upon itself to tackle the Afghanistan conundrum.
Had it not so, could anyone imagine where we'd be now, where would Afghanistan be now?
We must agree that there are non-resolvable problem. This is no excuse for not trying.
Many here have said that the main reason we have endless, pointless wars is money.
War profiteers just buy as many elections as they need to ensure our highly profitable wars will go on forever.
I hope this view of war gains ground in the popular press.
At some point, our collective way of thinking about wars might really shift from the standard ‘John Wayne’ mythology to a straightforward economic analysis.
After that, we may come to include the names of the most voracious war profiteers in most public discussions of war. In time, maybe we could even name the specific corporate executives, politicians and generals who toil day and night to perpetuate our for-profit death industry.
3
We could start by thinking of Afghanistan as a region instead of a country. It is populated by tribal groups who prove time and again that they are incapable of cooperating, so that to lead, one group always has to dominate the others, who immediately fight back. It is bordered by a region that Pakistan refers to as the "tribal areas" and which they admit they are unable to govern, or even wield much influence.
The trouble is that left to their own devices, one group or another would provide a safe harbor for our enemies. If it wasn't for that fact, we could pack up and leave tomorrow.
If "victory" means getting these disparate tribes to work together and form a functional nation, it isn't up to us and it isn't likely to happen. If "stalemate" means keeping our enemies from gaining a safe base from which to attack us here in America, we might be stuck. Do we really care if the Taliban run half the country but leave us alone? I don't, at least not enough to support a permanent military presence.
3
Imagine conducting a counter-insurgency war as a democracy and updating the public every month or quarter with an honest assessment of the human toll, the corruption of the supported government and the mediocrity of its army.
I say "imagine" because it would never actually happen for obvious reasons. If it did happen, the insurgents would sit in a bunker and play Scrabble until the voters defeated the foreign army for them.
Future presidents, borrow a lesson from poker players and make decisions that will avoid creating future tough decisions and the risk of compounding errors. Avoid creating terrible spots where the temptation will be to conduct a foreign counter-insurgency war. Go kill the next Bin Laden after his first attack even if it might cost a few lives. Arm and prepare our allies to defend themselves in peacetime to deter a war or win it without a massive ground forces intervention from our military. Use game theoretic analysis to protect our systems from sabotage before they are sabotaged, not after it happens once. Save your counter-insurgency impulses for where they are needed and where they will work - fighting organized crime.
I teach a class on the Vietnam War and have commented in class that the war in Afghanistan will likely continue indefinitely due to the lack of a draft. The distance between a professional military caste and an American public seemingly unconcerned with the affairs in Afghanistan and Iraq will continue to grow.
6
mr. douthat's review misses the mark on several points.
the most important is that the WP analysis and quoting of the documents shows that the USA "had no policy" in afghanistan and that "nobody knew what's going on" and "we had no plan for victory". so to claim that the events unfolded as a "strategic" policy is simply false. there has been nothing strategic about it.
the second is that WP has a separate page where people quoted in the report have a chance to respond. and it is disturbing to read the many "i don't remember saying that" or "i would never use that word" comments by these people to the transcripts or reports of their SIGAR interviews.
the last point is: c'mon. there is no war specific blindness or apathy in the american electorate. there is no issue of accepting a war or not, or "swallowing a stalemate."
in some respects, the war is operational tuning and testing of the military capabilities. we have the "best" (largest) military because it is in continual foreign engagement, live fire operation -- and we spend the money to keep it running that way. people love their heroes, and it's a job.
for the rest, the afghan war is identical to climate change. so long as people don't feel the pain, and the pain is not accurately reported in the media -- and so long as americans choose to look backwards and wish that things will remain the same forever -- then america will sleep.
"17% trust in government" is not alert suspicion -- it's selfie apathy.
My friends in the British Army like to remind me that when Sherlock Holmes friend, Dr. Watson, was famously wounded at the Battle of Maiwand Britain had already been involved in Afghanistan for more than four decades. They remained, off and on at least, until their departure from India in 1947 only to be sucked in once again by U.S. involvement after 9/11.
By those standards, we are just getting started. Like the British, we can't win but we can't seem to leave.
2
Will these revelations finally allow openly asking the questions: why do we go to war so frequently, who benefits from waging war, how can we get the public to always be skeptical when the president presents the arguments for going to war??
Ironically, despite increased knowledge of its lies, Viet Nam continues to fail as the tragically cautionary, countervailing tale it should represent. Indeed, Viet Nam era service and, resultantly, that war itself have been rehabilitated and burnished in the national mind in our impulse to almost slavishly honor military service at any level over the past twenty some years.
A great part of that deference, of course, lies in national relief and guilt that (courtesy of the professional not conscripted military), it is them not "us" who are actually doing the fighting. And - "thank you for your service" - we're basically acceptant of that as an ongoing fact of modern American life.
4
Bring back conscription and the wars will end.
2
Reinstate the draft. Volunteers will still be able to choose their path. But unless the involuntary get killed, including sons and daughters of the rich and powerful and connected, why would we stop? I'm eating donuts and watching TV. You're getting your heads blown off. Really? Do tell.
4
Ever notice the Byzantinian course of American involvement in the unending civil strife of southern and middle Asia?
America's involvement in Afghanistan began with materiel support for the Taliban faction that was battling the Soviet invasion of 1979.
In retrospect, several years of Soviet occupation would likely have benefited the primitive, ever-warring Afghan people. Families would be moved out of disease-infested villages into concrete apartment blocks, religious superstition would be stamped out, the men would be put to work, the women would be liberated, the children would be educated, and a vile culture would be shut down.
But, the Soviets soon found Afghanistan to be an untenable military sinkhole. They withdrew in 1980, leaving behind their experience as an unlearned lesson for American military planners.
America's entanglement in Afghanistan begin in earnest with aerial attacks on al-Qaeda, the Saudi-Arabian terrorists camped in the mountains of southern Afghanistan. It soon morphed into all-out war with the Taliban, the most popular and powerful faction in the Afghan civil war.
And here we are! Our military forces in Afghanistan are stuck in a quagmire with no end in sight. They depend on a supply line stretching halfway around the world across several untrustworthy countries. They are vulnerable to attack with modern weapons by nearby Iran, the nation the US is presently goading into battle.
Can we learn from $2 trillion dollars worth of example?
2
@AynRant
If we had put 2 trillion into alternative energy (or a simple carbon tax) we would have:
1) destroyed the economic might of Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Russia almost overnight
2) not lost a single man in an unwinnable war
3) created and patented the greatest source of energy for the next hundred-plus years
But nah, lets just go in and wreck house, *exactly as Osama BIn Landen wanted* (and Putin, for that matter). What a bunch of chumps we are.
317
@J c
If we had put 2 trillion into alternative energy we would have
wasted 2 trillion because it will never be competitive. The science proves that. We could have "destroyed the economic might of Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Russia" by subsidizing oil, but in fact we have now achieved that goal, without spending 2 trillion, with the fracking revolution.
1
@Jonathan Katz
The single reason alternative energy (nuclear/fusion, solar, wind, whatever) is not "competitive" is that we massively subsidize the infrastructure and waste disposal of fossil fuel energy sources.
That is:
- the extraction is subsidized
- the security of the infrastructure (ie the wars) is subsidized
- the waste disposal (pollution and carbon-based climate change) is completely unpaid for (and thus subsidized)
If you think that burning the results of solar energy is more efficient than directly converting it to energy our thermodynamics has a few rules for you to get acquainted with.
You can't get something for nothing. If you do, someone else is paying.
7
I didn't see a mention of "the draft" in your thought provoking Viet Nam comparison. Current conflicts are fought by volunteers not conscripts. The families who suffer the true pain of anxiety and loss in the conflicts are but a tiny percentage of the population at large. The rest of us are free to ignore the real costs.
13
@ed
There was one. Viz.
"The differences begin with the absence of a draft"
10
@ed
“The differences begin with the absence of a draft....”
Para 3, line 1.
This is by design. A draft for Iraq or Afghanistan would have forced Americans to engage with the necessity or otherwise of these military actions, and would have doubtless spawned a furious backlash.
Americans are quite happy to send professional soldiers to die and get maimed in dubious wars of choice with no clear objectives and no accountability for those who order them or prolong them. Makes a mockery of the notion of “support.” The only Americans who really support our troops are the ones who oppose these wars.
125
“As with other features of our decadence, a Pax Americana sustained by indefinite police actions, indefinitely frozen conflicts and indefinite postponements of defeat is hardly the worst geopolitical scenario imaginable, and definitely preferable to certain bloodier alternatives.”
In short: do what we say, or we’ll nuke you, because Jesus gave America the power of the atom to maintain its dominion over the rest of the world. Get used to it?
You ignore a major reason for the failure of USA's intervention in Afghanistan: The inexplicable and foolish decision of GW Bush (+ the GOP) to start a new war in Iraq in the pursuit of imaginary Weapons of Mass Destruction without first finishing off the Taliban. The Taliban had been routed in battle, but not destroyed. The Iraq war, which must surely rank as a historic folly (strategic comparisons with Hitler's Eastern front with Russia or the Japan's attack on USA come to mind), distracted our armed forces from the task at hand, and allowed the Taliban time to regroup and re-emerge as a potent threat to peace and democracy. Did Mr. Douthat go along with invading Iraq (like the media- NYT included) although Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and no WMD? We continue to the price for that folly- in $ and lives.
3
The home of the free and the brave. The Gulf of Tonkin, weapon of mass destruction, the cover up of Abu Ghraib and now Afghanistan. How can a nation be free when the voters are lied to so many times? Are Daniel Berrigan,Edward Snowden or Daniel Jones (the man who uncovered the Abu Ghraib scandal) traitors or the people who told us the truth? As far as climate change goes this administration refuses even to discuss it because it doesn’t exist. Billions spent on so called national defense. When will we learn that the military will not solve the social,economic or political issues of the world.
1
The debacles in Vietnam and the Middle East stem in part from our decision during the Cold War to create a military establishment that would dwarf that of any other country. That choice, in turn, reflected the belief that only the threat of force would deflect the expansionist ambitions of the Soviet Union.
Although probably a correct reading of Russian intentions, that fateful decision encouraged American policymakers to rely on the blunt force of military might, rather than on the more traditional and subtle tools of diplomacy, to resolve international challenges. A country which spends a substantial portion of its resources on arms and soldiers will find a way to justify their use to defend the national interest. Even in the absence of open warfare, our arsenal shaped foreign policy through violent interventions in Iran, Guatemala and Chile, to name only the most obvious examples.
These conflicts, and the more violent confrontations in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq all flowed from a compelling logic, deeply influenced by our experience with Hitler. We faced an enemy who scorned the less brutal pressures of diplomacy, one, moreover, whose victory would threaten the world we sought to create.
This mindset, which converted every minor conflict into a threat to world peace, has converted us into crusaders who justify attacks on even weak enemies as necessary to keep them from our shores. Our folly is breathtaking.
Interesting that both wars were founded and fought on total lies. In Vietnam, we believed the Communist domino effect and in Afghanistan, we believed that 911 hijacked planes charade. Conveniently, we have total amnesia over the Saudis involvement in 911. To add another lie to the pile, Iraq and the weapons of mass destruction.
So this is twenty-first-century America the home of lies 24/7 and our name and our word are worthless. Where can we possibly go from here or as Pogo says, "the enemy is us"!
America is an empire in its late stages. No draft, no photos of returning caskets in Dover, no raised taxes to pay for it, better battlefield medicine, fewer casualties = no citizen cares what our gov't does = dying democracy.
Add in a Trump cult-like figure who is seen by the angriest among us as speaking "truth about the current malaise of soft corruption" while still stacking the deck with hard right Republican partisans who create identical policies, and due process, etc. is but a faint ember glow.
I vote to disband America into its component pieces. The red states can lower taxes and have no services, cling to carbon, void health care, keep women at home, make religion compulsory, imprison LGBT; make abortion illegal. The blue states can do the opposite, thrive, and civility and progress will return.
4
Casualty reports should include suicides by veterans forever impacted by their deployments to Afghanistan.
How absolutely heartbreaking and tragic.
There’s a reason Afghanistan is called the graveyard of empires. George W Bush may have been right to support the Northern Alliance against their Taliban - his mistake was leaving troops there to engage in “nation building.” Nobody likes foreigners coming in and telling them how to run things.
1
A military fairly conscripted from the entire population (no more mysterious, disappearing bone spurs) would go a long way to reset the public frame of mind regarding military adventurism. As matters stand now the ranks come largely (not entirely) from rural and urban areas of impoverishment whilst the officers are to too great a degree are people who are ideological militarists.
What part of "Graveyard of Empires" didn't we understand?
Oh wait, now I remember. We're EXCEPTIONAL. We deluded ourselves (again) into thinking we could actually win Something in this demonstrably unwinnable region.
Joke's on us.
The American public can also reflect on the Vietnam War in the present. I think there is a legitimate public anxiety about recreating the Fall of Saigon. Every time we talk about removing troops from Afghanistan entirely, everyone kind of says, "Wait, wait, wait, let's think about this." There's some contemporary evidence to support this reservation as well. Need I mention ISIS.
The other thing to consider is the Afghanistan War began with broad public support. We were there to kill Bin Laden and ferret out the terrorists. Pretty simply and straight forward. After Tora Bora though, the mission creep began. The Bush administration needed a way to politically justify the military failure of letting Bin Laden escape. Afghanistan morphed into a nation building project.
By the time we finally killed Bin Laden in Pakistan, we were already in over our heads. US policy had committed us to an binary decision. Either we accept total and utter defeat or Afghanistan becomes a permanent US protectorate.
Patton was wrong about our addiction to victory. We can mention North Korea, Vietnam, the First Gulf War and many others. However, Patton was right about our contempt for defeat. Hence, the fall of Saigon. Trump might be foolish enough to pull troops out of Afghanistan but that's not really what the American public wants.
We don't want to hand the country over to the Taliban after decades of blood. America didn't feel the same way about Vietnam. And quite frankly, Nixon lied.
1
@Andy
The exact same arguments were used to justify our continued involvement in Viet Nam as we hear today with Afghanistan, see Pete Buttigieg. Our rooftop departure in Saigon was a lot uglier than what Trump ordered in Syria, despite how it's portrayed by the defenders of American imperialism. Were the Kurds really "slaughtered"? Didn't they then help us with the next mission? Most of the ISIS escapees were women and children family members, who now the UN is pushing us to release from their "cages" anyway. This media spin keeps us in foreign wars, plain and simple.
1
The draft created democratic participation and made the Congress accountable. In the absence of a draft the population has no “skin in the game”. Without a draft, Congress is happy to hand it’s Constitutional obligation to declare war over to the Executive Branch.
Our war in Afghanistan was based on the presence of Al Qaeda in the country, while the 9/11 attack was perpetrated by 19 Wahhabi Salafi fanatics 15 of them were from Saudi Arabia all of them were indoctrinated by Saudi Wahhabi fanatics and they were funded by Saudis. So why did we attack Afghanistan? To root out Al Qaeda? Then we waged war on Iraq which had no Al Qaeda presence and nothing to do with 9/11. Oh, Iraq did not have any weapons of mass destruction either. In other words, the forever war, the war on terror is based on lies, incompetence, and greed. Every soldier killed or injured were betrayed by our government. Every soldier killed or injured registered as dollars made by oil, defense, and banking industries. Not one politician has called for an investigation of money paid to political campaigns by these industries.
1
I commend Mr. Douthat for this perceptive essay.
Tax everybody to pay for the war and bring a no-exception draft into being and we will leave Afghanistan sooner rather than later. It’s amazing how people change when they have skin in the game.
205
@Mike S. To your point -- and all those draft dodgers -- Cheney, Perle, Wolfowitz, and war evaders -- W -- supported the war in Vietnam, campaigned for it...what hypocrites, they had no conscience, anyone who supports a war must be prepared to fight it, without exceptions. And pay for it.
22
A universal draft, young, old, men, women would do many things. We might draft top notch programmers, techies and have systems that can actually talk to each other; might not use foreign technology. Letters home might highlight incompetence in leadership; might emphasize that right-to-repair machinery privatization contract insult. Might get us to actually debate what we as a nation stand for, and yes, will fight for.
It will not stop Russia from invading Ukraine, North Korea from launching missiles on the South. It won’t stop China from retaking Taiwan, Iran from taking Iraq....and on and on. It will make us hyper-isolationist, waiting for some justifiable attack on us. We will turn our backs on starvation, climate devastation, war crimes of every stripe. Not our problem. Not our kids to die for.
I am for that type of draft. But not the resulting isolationism. What do we stand for, should stand for? What is your answer?
4
@Jo Williams Sure, a weak military of old, resentful and fearful non-fighters is sure to defeat foreign fighters protecting their lands from imperialism. Adding tyranny doesn't make things better.
3
If we want to control the military industrial complex we must have some sort of compulsory military service for all so there is a connection between all Americans and what the military is doing.
3
Another triumph of the magic of the free market being the solution to every problem as the volunteer army decouples the military from civilian society and an endless war is out of sight out of mind for those not having any significant risk in it continuing
1
Another example of the decline of the American Empire.
1
It evidently took the Washington Post 3 years of legal wrangling to get just this amount of info that our government, our military had compiled. Under the Freedom of Information Act. Freedom of Information. Let me just chew on that bit of Wonderlandesque doublespeak. While this current administration is doing all it can to hide it’s...outreach ....to Ukraine. And maybe Turkey, Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea. Who knows. We certainly don’t, and won’t, for what, another ten years?
Then there’s the line item not mentioned in these Afghan Papers. How much did we pay Pakistan over our years of forever war? To be an....ally. We knew, from the very first time the enemy decamped over that border. We knew when they shut that border to our troops- and long before; they were the only nation that recognized the Taliban government.
And the forever war mantra. Parallels to Vietnam, Korea. Hello, can you say nuclear war? We, Russia, China, and now Iran, North Korea- backing our pet ...allies, ideologies, trade opportunities. We dare not make war too well, go too far over a border. We still bear that burden-of-fear to start a nuclear war.
“We were aware”. Answers, solutions? Well, we’ll spend a long time in forever analysis of this latest info dump.
Meanwhile, all those millions living under dictators, theocrats, kleptocrats, still thinking there might be one shining light out there to pin their hopes on- to say nothing of those Afghan troops who actually want their own government?
1
At the close of the film, "Charlie Wilson's War," after the Mujahideen force the Soviet's retreat, CIA operative Gust Avrakotos warns Congressman Wilson that a military defeat is not enough. He urges Wilson to appeal to Congress for more funding for rebuilding Afghanistan's schools and to enable them to re-build a stable government. Wilson took Gust's advice, but couldn't get Congress to approve more funding. As Gust feared, our failure to do re-build the schools enabled the "crazies" to educate the children.
When will we learn that bombs, missiles and rockets don't fix broken nations?
1
Mr. Douthat manages to describe a hugely expensive, deadly, failed, and futile effort without making any case for stopping the Afghan mistake now----i.e., doing what is best for our nation. What is the point of having an international pulpit in a respected newspaper if one constantly describes events from an ivory tower without making the obvious, necessary, and strong case for doing the right thing? Is Douthat or this journal indebted to the military industrial complex----the only true beneficiaries of this disaster?
An honest conservative who cares about the future of our nation would demand that we stop this madness now.
1
Imagine what it will be like when the armies of the world are full of robots. Perhaps wars will continue until one side can’t afford new robots.
Will our politicians never have an honest discussion of our senseless warfare mentality and excessive and reckless defense spending? Will we reject our mercenary armies? Will we subject American warriors to the War Crimes courts?
The downfall of America will not be in a president's petty lies, crimes and misdemeanors. It will be, instead, in our insatiable need for weapons of war and conduct of wars abroad. The downfall of empires is clearly spelled out in the history books, not from conquest, but from internal rot and excessive obsession with war.
63
@Kami Kata
Probably not. If the country has spent almost 1 Trillion dollars on the war, that means that someone else has received almost 1 Trillion dollars. Some of that money has gone to corrupt leaders in Afghanistan, but a whole lot more has gone to defense contractors--and some of THAT money comes right back to supporting campaigns for people who will countenance a low casualty war. Maybe that can be the next installment in the Post's expose....
5
@Kami Kata And it's exactly what Osama Bin Laden said was his stated goal. America is the fool because it suffers from hubris and too much money provided by citizens who don't care about war or deficits.
3
Basic problem in Afghanistan: the local elites simply want to siphon off as many dollars as possible to finance their homes in Dubai, and there are no Afghan men willing to fight for *our* vision of a better Afghanistan i.e. girl'soccer. And the Taliban have the will to defeat our puppet regime, sooner or later. We do not have the will the defeat the Taliban.
2
It's an old band-aid, stuck fast with infected, caked-on blood. Left on so long due to lies. Removing it will cause a lot of pain and leave a mess of a wound we tell ourselves. Just put another clean one on top...just coverup the rot. Over and over.
But the dirty band-aids must be removed, in the same way helicopters leaving rooftops ripped an older wound in '75. There's still a livid scar, though, against all odds, that wound has healed over, most of the poison has drained away. Former enemies are making plans and doing business.
It is time to bring the soldiers home from Afghanistan ...whatever the cost looks like now. It will need much care and time, but wounds may heal only when the cutting stops.
Mr. Douthat fails to mention that these interminable wars provide a reason d'être for continuing to lavish taxpayer dollars on the military, industrial complex to the everlasting detriment to our pressing needs at home.
3
My explanation is first, no draft so all the sacrifice and dying is done by “volunteers” and second, the wave of faux patriotism that has washed over this country allowing us to stage family reunions for returning service men and women as a form of public spectacle without confronting our complicity (by omission) in their deployments. Come on, almost everyplace you go now offers a military or veteran’s discount. What more could you want?
1
This is a thoughtful piece. It has many ideas worth careful consideration, and asks questions we need to ask. Good job.
I'd add another possibility. It may not be something changed in the American public, "proving that 21st-century Americans have learned to swallow stalemate."
Instead, it may be that the national security state learned from its long study of the Vietnam debacle. Maybe we are not different, but they are.
They know how to lie to us better. They know better how to cram it down.
Also, it may be our press is worse. There have been many changes in our press since Vietnam. They have been real, big money changes, as revenue has left the traditional outlets, and the Fairness Doctrine is lost, and we now have gibbering lying stuntmen selling themselves with very different revenue streams.
The Washington Post did reveal, but it took an extra 15 years for the Post to get around to it. The NYT has never done it -- and before the Pentagon Papers came from the NYT, not the Post.
Who is today's Daniel Ellsberg? We have not one but three people now hiding from power, Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, and Chelsea Manning. Our "press" turned them away, and stabbed them in the back. They've been utterly betrayed by the likes of the NYT. Thus, so have we all been betrayed by those who chose to serve power and the lies of power.
We were warned. The same press pushed the Iraq War, and the NYT offered us only the Friedman Unit from the man still making such pronouncements.
As long as there are young people who see the most feasible financial decision being to get something on their resume that given them some advantage (joining the military) and at the same time sense that serving in the military is an honorable endeavor, there will be hearty enough young adults for corrupt politicians to send other folk's children to fight for insufficient reasons. We need a draft. Period. We will always have a few, select families (bone spur's dad and Bush 1) to protect their less-than-capable young males from having to serve.
Just the number. Two trillion. It’s surreal.
Honestly, there must’ve been an extensive amount of corruption. How can you even spend that much money? That’s $2,000 Billion dollars.
1
Politicians get paid to keep the wars going by the Industrial Murder Industry. Our government is bought.
The will of the people means nothing anymore.
1
America will escape from Afghanistan and other military quagmires only when the American public begins to actually care about the lives of its soldiers. Right now Americans pay hypocritical lip service to their soldiers and veterans, thanking them for their service. But no one really cares if the soldiers live or die. No one cares about the agony your veterans are suffering, with high rates of PTSD and suicide.
When was the last time you heard a Democratic presidential candidate talk about getting out of Afghanistan? They don't bother talking about it, because they know you don't care.
1
Why do we elect liars to public office?
Why do we tolerate such corruption in public office?
Why aren't the generals falling to their knees and apologizing to the American people for wasting so many American lives.
They can fall on their swords next.
The blinding reality is there has never been a counterinsurgency operation in a failed state that as set it on a path to democracy and development. It is arrogance to think that military force can bring a country from a tribal society to a democratic state in one generation.
Look at the book Why Nations Fail and extrapolate the lesson of how long it takes countries to solve the problems of tribalism, corruption, the abuse of military and police force, political and religious factionalism. It took europe 1000 years to figure that out.
The soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen have served honorably and with valor under the worst leadership imaginable.
When Ross serves three tours as a private in Iraq and Afghanistan and now Syria perhaps his goateed face will have some credibility. Let him put his boots on the ground.
Until then...
Vietnam Vet
Eisenhower did warn us about the military-industrial complex.
Maybe much like epidemic, insidious but never ending or acted upon suicides of despair our country too in many ways at home and in endless wars is committing a suicide of despair. A lack of rage is a lack of action and an engendering of apathy.
The "agony of Vietnam"? Of course, Mr. Douthat means American agony. Vietnamese suffering, and with the scale inconceivable, would have been forgettable collateral damage.
Here, Douthat unwitting confirms the truth of his own argument: all that matters is bad press and American inconvenience, and if that can be minimized, who's to stop the killing?
Deep down, the American people knows it benefits from endless wars, that is, that those endless wars are a necessary evil in order for them to keep their lifestyle (cheap gas, cheap Walmart goods, consumerism, etc.). They know the USA is an empire.
The thing here is this: the American people waits for the result of the war (meanwhile, they pretend they "don't know"). If the war is a success, they adopt the narrative they were "spreading freedom" and that the war was "just"; if the war is a failure, then some "leaked documents" show up in some big newspaper with enough credibility so the American people can quickly shift to the narrative of "corruption", and that the war was "unjust", that they were "deceived".
However, it doesn't change the fact on the field: the American people will always support any war their government want to wage because they know this is the cost of their lavish lifestyle ("American Dream"). It is unfair to blame the USG for its own people's moral failures.
The jaundiced eye with which Americans now view political leadership is a result of the age of information The US is built on philosophical ideals and not evolved from kings and churches. Strongly held ideals however, create the basis for confirmation bias, the tendency to seek and notice information which supports what we believe and ignore information that doesn't. Prior to TV coverage, 24 hour news and the internet, it was easier to confirm the beliefs that were instilled in us via the Americanization process of public education and the daily reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance. When information poses negatively challenges how we see ourselves, we get sad, angry and embarrassed. Live coverage of African American children being protected by the National Guard from racists in 1957, Bull Connor deploy ing dogs and fire hoses, etc., did as much as MLK did in advancing civil rights. The same with Viet Nam, Nixon, Trump, etc. Eventually you can't deny the images and discrepant information. Ultimately we cannot justify the unjustifiable, but we get angry, sad and seek to blame someone for it but due to the entrenched political parties that have become our aristocracy, we have become dis-empowered. We are better than our leadership, but we have become disaffected with political process and involvement. As Plato noted, "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.
1
I recall visiting a Russian military museum in Ryazan, Russia in 1991, escorting a visiting high school group, when a local person said to me when looking at items from their Afghan war, "This was our Vietnam," followed by a conversation about a misguided, winless engagement. And here we are now, 30 years later, perhaps saying to common Russians, we replicated your folly.
61
@KJB
So.... let me understand.
The Soviets felt that their experience in Afghanistan was akin to the US experience in Vietnam.
The US then went into Afghanistan - despite ALL of the very real warnings that we'd be repeating Vietnam AGAIN
How stupid are we?
10
The best way to win the hearts and minds of potential enemies is to ensure that we have a flourishing, just and open society back home.
1
As with the Vietnam war and the invasion of Iraq our occupation of Afghanistan has proven not only misguided but once again arrogant about its ignorance. These wars were fought in places we knew little about, places that not only do not share our ideas of community and purpose but even our concepts of time. To be blunt, Afghanistan exists only on a flat map since the people inside its borders share nothing but differences of value, language and necessity. Outside Kabul and Kandahar the country is tribal and in the hands of either warlords or Taliban. What motivates the Pentagon has been in my lifetime a dream of hegemony and great profiteering in a revolving door between public and private sector, as Eisenhower warned against in his final speech as President. Theirs is a vast breakable economy that needs constant war to justify spending and waste, and it is a horror that for decade after decade of sham wars rotten from the foundation up real blood is shed by patriots we ultimately prove died for nothing but false pride and real profit. Anyone who knew the Middle East at all in the eighties and nineties would expect the wars we began there to blow up the region into tribal and religious warfare beyond our control. Whether from neo-cons or so-called devotees of Realpolitik the motives behind our vast adventurism across the globe are capitalist, not a cry for either democracy or security.
2
I have to admit that in 2001 the idea that we could turn Afghanistan into a modern liberal democracy was appealing despite that little voice in my head that said that you can't change such a religiously based culture that easily. As secular as we are the religious right [including you Ross] still wields considerable power in our own country. Add to that the essential tribalism that rends that country and there really is no hope. Let's pull out and leave them to their misery.
Well, it's bit ironing the gentleman, while summarizing first few paragraphs of WP's history of misinformation and lying about Afghanistan, is, without missing a beat, making predictions about troops' policy of President Bernie Sanders .
The total corporate takeover of our government, media and universities began simultaneously with the collapse of the Soviet Union. It meant that military objectives no longer could follow strategies for competition with military threats to our security but instead could be subordinated to nice free market goals of competition for valuable resources. The world for that is colonialism, but we fired all the Marxians who would have called it that. If you cannot insulate military strategy from competing, self-serving business interests you are certainly never going to end your foreign wars.
I have not given up my anti-war stance. It is why I didn't vote for Clinton and why I won't vote for Biden. It is why I am disgusted by the Democratic Party getting mad about troop withdrawal from Syria.
It is why no one in my family will ever volunteer for the armed services.
No one in my family will ever be prepared to die for no reason.
66
@Willt26, guess I am missing something from your comments: it was George W Bush and the Neo-Cons who invented the weapons of mass destruction ploy to get us into Iraq and the same admin that surged troop levels to keep America in the Middle East after 2008. Why would you vote for Trump in 2020 as his administration does not coordinate with Congress, he just issues dictates. Democrats AND Republicans were both upset with Trump because he took unilateral action without a plan to protect gains in Syria and ceded that area to Turkey and Russia and allowed our allies to be killed and displaced.
As stated above, the US could and should have invested money into renewable energy sources and long ago weaned itself off Middle Eastern petroleum. The first Gulf War (1990-91) led to Osama Bin Laden using that as an excuse to attack America and the region remains a strategic interest to this day. If oil was less important, so would be the Middle East and the religious fanatics found there.
It is doubtful that you can enforce your statement about "no one in my family will ever volunteer." You may feel that way, but your grandchildren may feel differently.
Lastly, many would suggest to you that too many young people are dying today from Opiod overdose and gun violence for "no reason."
19
@Willt26 -- I agree completely.
I am however shocked that this NYT Pick has so few recommendations as of this moment.
5
@Willt26 Bush 41 got us into Iraq. Then Bush 43 got us back into Iraq then into Afghanistan. Did you vote for them?
12
I am convinced that if this conflict had involved a broad-based draft people would be more invested. Instead, we the military, and by extension us, have cynically recruited young people who disproportionately represent lower income and educated populations.
Since this conflict doesn't touch each of us equally, we lose interest. What we should be asking is what could we have done with the several TRILLION DOLLARS to improve the lives of those in our country who need the help.
We need to ask our representatives to bring these brave people home, and stop feeding on the fear that if we abandon the field of battle we will be left vulnerable to terrorism at home...the chances for which are less than being hit by a car for the average American.
4
There is no “winning” in Afghanistan, but there can be a goal: to keep radicalized groups from finding a foothold there. That requires an intelligence network with an understanding of the culture.
Over a period of time development of valuable mineral resources may bring some measure of modernization. Aide groups can see that medical care is delivered. The Chinese may open up the countryside by building good roads, but true change, with an end to the horrible conditions for women, is not going to be forced from the outside.
One thing that is missing is the role of the Military-Industrial Complex. If you pay people to wage war, there are going to make sure there are wars to wage. That is the reason the Pentagon opposes any troop removal from anywhere.
4
This article is a great disservice to the brave American soldiers who have fought in Afghanistan these past several decades and who will fight there in the coming centuries. Freedom!!!
2
@Keitr
And you can be there fighting next to those brave American soldiers! Enlist now! If you're too old, or have bone spurs, you can go to Afghanistan and do volunteer work for one of the many non-governmental organizations--those people risk their lives too, and no one ever goes up to them and says: "Thank you for your service," since they don't have a uniform that advertises their status. Do it now! For Freedom!
@Keitr This article in no way criticizes "the soldiers" who hump the hills and walk the streets. It's critical of the political and military leadership who put their careers and power over the lives of soldiers and civilians, and of you and I who let them get away with it.
1
@Keitr
Well put! If perhaps too sarcastically.
'But there is still something unusually grim about reading The Post’s catalog of the official deceptions that have carried us through 18 years in Afghanistan...'
Not unusually. Usually.
2
As long as Americans buy into the myth that leadership of the military hold a near sacred status that places them head and shoulders above civilian leadership Americans will be duped by this highly political self-interested agency. The Pentagon is fully accountable to both Congress and the American people; they must no longer be permitted to operate in a secret privileged realm that is shielded from scrutiny. It is not unpatriotic to question the military with respect to its budgets, operations, or objectives. It is, to the contrary, very patriotic to scrutinize the military with the rigor and a healthy degree of skepticism. Eisenhower was right.
10
Excellent article. What's missing in this historical comparison is the increased involved of the private sector and the profit motive in our endless warfare. To this extent, Eisenhower's concerns about our "industrial military industrial complex" seems very prescient. So, when there is no draft, few casualties (American, that is) and a LOT of money to be made our war machine will just keep humming along.
9
Drone warfare and targeted assassinations have sanitized our war-making. Fewer casualties (both civilian and military), fewer troops on the ground, less anti-war opposition at home.
Jasper
1
So what else is new? Eisenhower told us what to expect. If I am in the business of making war materiel, if my livelihood depends on it, I want to keep on making it. This is means my war materiel must be used so I can keep on making more. How is war materiel used? Well, in war, of course. Thus, there must always be a war, or wars, somewhere in the world. And, inevitably, to make sure there's always a war somewhere the people who profit from war will lie about it. Sorry, it's not complicated.
7
I agree with Mr. Douthat that the most significant factor that explains the degree of popular opposition to the (hated) Vietnam War and the (quietly ongoing) war in Afghanistan results from the fact that our armed forces are no longer supplemented by the draft. The strong anti-war passions of the 1960s and 1970s were fueled, in the beginning, by people who watched their friends and children, young men, plucked up by the draft and sent far into Vietnam. My gentle Indiana cousin returned from Indochina as an alcoholic and died young of a skin disease. A young man I’d dated in St. Louis dropped out of college, was drafted, served in Vietnam, returned, and eventually smashed his car into a concrete bridge support. Years later, a vet told me “That was no accident. That was a suicide.”
And, of course, there were other strong passions storming through the US at that time, ignited by African-Americans, women, and gays seeking their civil rights.
But there’s one piece of information, of history, that Mr. Douthat ignores. What about the War in Iraq? Built on lies about Weapons of Mass Destruction. Whipped into life by Dick Cheney. And strongly reported in the news (I remember watching photos broadcast by the PBS News Hour of young American soldiers killed each day, in Iraq. Harrowing.) And, over time, opposition to that tangled slaughter intensified.
Why Iraq and not Afghanistan?
3
American citizens are footing the bill for a self sustaining military industrial complex that supports a select few. The real losers here are the American military who die or are maimed, their families and the million of people who are in the sights of our military weapons. People whose homes, businesses, and family members of the casualty of those weapons. Citizens of other countries for whom our government does not care a bit. Human beings who are merely collateral damage.
The colonial era should have died with the last casualty of WWI. Perhaps humans simply cannot comprehend the futility of war.
7
Who ever believed U.S. fighting in Afghanistan was just?
Afghanistan has alway been a giant arena to showcase goodies made by the military industrial complex.
How can we spend so much money on war products and not get to use them? We have to play somewhere.
5
True patriotism is not thanking service men and women with empty words such as ,"Thank you for your service," but ensuring that our soldiers are deployed only for the justified wars with the right scope. In this aspect, we have failed as a nation.
12
@Purota Master Bring back the draft, no exceptions or deferments and we'll see how long wars last.
Is Afghanistan a hot war, a cold war, or some new hybrid? Clearly, the American people have long accepted prolonged cold wars. The cold war with the USSR, the Korean peninsula, and our Cuban policy are all examples of long running cold wars. Afghanistan with it's very limited casualties these last few years appears to be morphing from a hot war to a cold war. That said, the issue becomes what kind of strategy is acceptable to the American people. A hot war like the Obama surge, or a cold war with the occasional fatality.
The unanswered question always in the back of my mind is why the GENERALS who manage, stage and encourage these unwinable quagmires are NEVER held accountable.
17
@nlightning The generals are always on the verge of winning because they love war. That's how promotions happen.
@nlightning who would they be accountable to? The politicians are not going to because they are all in it together.
@nlightning because they will always ( have always been able to ) say they were following the orders of their commander and chief: the real war criminal in all this.
to what extent was the Pentagon wrong as opposed to lying? bret Stephens has argued that a low level American presence in Afghanistan is both necessary and sustainable. finally low level conflicts persist with consequences for American interests. are we to simply ignore them? the Romans manned the borders for centuries, as a condition for the health and safety of the empire.
1
@rhporter -- The Romans mismanaged those borders, and it finally killed them as the Barbarians sacked Rome several times.
That is not a good excuse for endless war. It argues rather that some sort of peace from strength should be made while the bargaining advantage is so strongly on our side.
One thing you left out - money. War is a moneymaker and always has been. Many of those lucrative defense contracts dry up if all the troops come home and then what gifts would politicians have to bestow upon their big donors? After almost 20 years, war is baked into the US economy. Prying that loose now is about a whole lot more than than winning or losing.
14
@WesternMass -- Yes, money. But it applies to other things too.
Money left the news organizations that confronted power over the Vietnam War. Their lame performance reveals the loss.
Money left students, who now struggle under staggering debt, that keeps them focused on their own desperation.
Money poured in to politicians, as donors bought up the people who govern. It always bought some. Now, it owns them all, and with a stronger hand. GOPAC and Gingrich seized the House with the raw power of money, and everything shifted like that since for 20 years and more.
Money has left the middle class, and the wealthy have always been more likely to govern for wars and profits than for peace and lack of casualties among those who enlist.
Much has changed about money. Gen. Smedley Butler's theme that "War is a racket" was always true, and Eisenhower warned us again in his Farewell Address, but the changes involving money are elsewhere than in the military industrial complex.
8
@WesternMass Spot on and moreover, since Iraq we have seen lucrative commercialization of much of the personnel waging war itself through proliferation of private contractors serving either in mercenary "security" roles or myriad support services. This has increased financial incentive to remain at war and lessened any prospect of consequent public unrest.
@WesternMass
Exactly. But can we unbake this foul cake at this point? Mandatory conscription (that includes civil service) may be our best hope.
1
Americans have been subjected to an avalanche of propaganda to support these endless wars.
We have been lied to repeatedly. Our so called "free press" has acted as the governments stenographer running whatever the Pentagon or White House said as undisputed fact.
If the press played along, they got "continued access" for future stories. If not, they were iced.
So the media played along and the American people simply got played.
Our politicians lied as often as the media did. Both gave us endless stories about American bravery and sacrifice, all true. But no discussion about why we were there in the first place?
This WaPost story quotes senior generals who said that their "mission" changed constantly based on whatever Washington thought the public needed to hear to keep the killing machine going.
We were lied to about the Gulf of Tonkin. Lied to about Grenada, lied to about Panama, lied to about WMD's, lied to about capturing Bin Laden and laid to about our destruction of Libya and invasion of Syria.
The anti-war movement has been overwhelmed by the barrage of lies, the total failure of our democratic process and the lack of a truly free press.
How can we be "at war" for 17 years while the constitution says only congress has the power to declare war?
We've spent 5 trillion dollars, killed over a million people undermined our democracy and never declared war on anyone?
Where are the headlines saying "end these wars now."
We must say it. End these wars now.
20
@Drspock -- "Our so called "free press" has acted as the governments stenographer"
True, but. There has always been investigative reporting on the margins of press with power, money, and access. They used to publish in the major papers. The muckrakers were in our major press.
Now the muckrakers are in marginalized internet web sites. They are there. They are not picked up.
Instead, the people who were wrong, proven wrong, are still dominating the major press. The people who were right, proven right, are still out in those marginal internet web sites.
Money rules out press.
Access too rules, but access is indirectly a function of money. Access and stenography is cheaper content than aggressive reporting. It also protects the path to what money stream remains to our major press. Don't rock the boat, when it is in danger of swamping anyway.
1
Plus no mention of what Americans get for their tax dollar. Other countries get healthcare, education, and child care. The United States gets endless wars and pointless military spending. Now wonder less than one American in five does not trust the government.
16
@Boston Barry -- Worse. Four times the defense budget goes into the health care that does not cover all of us and that provides substandard outcomes overall.
Just over half of that money is what it costs to get total coverage and better outcomes in other countries.
Who is getting the rest, and why?
That is a clue to the wars too. Follow the money, the bigger money, the biggest money. It is being raked off in health care abuses, not wars.
They cannot be entirely separate problems. It is who controls government, and who profits from that control, that links them.
Would FDR do health care this way? Would he have done wars this way? Same problem, we don't have that sort of government anymore.
3
Those who profit from the war are dedicated to it. As long as most people have no skin in the game wars will continue. Given that there is no reliable evidence about these wars, the claims that they serve a useful purpose cannot be disputed.
6
@RG -- Except they can be disputed. They are disputed.
The dispute is in the marginal internet website press, not in our major press or from our "leaders" in politics. But it is there, it exists.
Why has the dispute been marginalized? Why don't we notice? Money. Donor money. Ownership of the politicians -- the step after "ownership of the means of production."
2
The Government has continually lied to to people and I suspect that the voting boxes were tampered with in the last election but the Government is afraid to tell the citizens
4
@Sean Daly Ferris -- They did not need to tamper with the voting boxes.
They might if they had to. So far, they are more firmly in control than that.
Our misgovernment goes far deeper than just one man, and has causes far deeper than foreign manipulation of very marginal advertising.
As we see the current Afghan version of the Pentagon Papers which demolished three administrations on the war in Vietnam I wonder if most of our recent presidents did not in fact deserve to be impeached and removed as much as Trump does.
2
@n1789 -- Obama himself struggled against, and lost against, the real powers who do this to us, the real powers that we must remove.
Changing one person in one office may be necessary, but it is not sufficient. It is a symptom of deeper problems, not the whole of it, nor even close.
1
Ross, you left out two words: "Defense Contractors." Of course the Afghanistan War will continue to drag on - it's very profitable to some very large political donors.
19
@Jason Shapiro -- That is an answer straight out of the 1930's Nye Commission investigation of American involvement in WW1.
We are much further down that road now. That was barely the start.
1
Just by sheer chance, USA has just avoided a similar grave mistake it was about to make in the northeast Syria. YPG supported by the US forces is composed of leftist militants, a minority in the Kurdish minority of Syria. (Syrian Kurds make 5-10% of the Syrian population) By letting them occupy one-third of Syrian territory USA was about to commit itself to an endless conflict with the Arabic majority of the area, with Turkey and probably with the conservative Kurds of Syria. Support for YPG should have been terminated once ISIS was defeated. Surely the danger ISIS presents continue, but now the fight against it is not a war against guerrillas but intelligence gathering and policing.
2
@ahmet andreas ozgunes -- True, but it is worse than that.
American involvement in Syria is years old, and from Day One it has been a fool's errand led by lies, told by war mongers.
There of course is an unfortunate similarity to the Pentagon Papers.
And Douthat is correct that three years of the President telling lies without numbers. supported by the Republican Party from the Senators, House members and party officials telling more lies to support an unfit President that the public has grown numb to the shock and outrage that we once had decades ago.
So when officers at the highest levels of our armed forces not only lie to us but go on to be promoted and the bureaucrats in the Pentagon contribute to the giant falsehoods we only grumble a bit.
And where is Congress who has the power of the purse and could stop this insanity in a moment? Hiding behind their desks terrified at being labeled soft on terrorism. It is much easier and no risk involved to give the military what they ask for.
Finally the absence of the draft which held the threat of death or dismemberment over all young men in the Vietnam era is gone. That makes this folly in Afghanistan far less personal. Trust me I lived through that period.
Nothing will come of this.
Trump is right for once about wanting to get out but is easily distracted and consumed by impeachment.
6
@Edward B. Blau -- Douthat to his credit did not say it was just the last three years of lies.
The lies are long standing. They predated Obama, and defeated Obama's efforts to stand against it.
To recall, Obama when he first took office rejected the Afghan plan. Then he rejected the revised plan prepared at his request. Then he rejected a third plan prepared at his demand. Then he drafted the outline of an acceptable plan in long hand on a legal notepad, about five pages worth as I recall.
Then they defied him in that, and his own proposal sank underneath the war plans he'd rejected.
1
U.S. military presence in Afghanistan? What does Afghanistan represent for the U.S., how fit into U.S. history?
The story of Afghanistan, the terrain, climate, situation of the enemy, reminds me of Indian wars in the U.S., especially trying to defeat/civilize/pacify the Apache, Navajo tribes. The Westward expansion of the U.S., Manifest Destiny, continues. The U.S. certainly tries to gain the upper hand in every Frontier Situation, whether Afghanistan or Somalia or deep forests of IndoChina. And when the U.S. meets with other civilizations (Islamic, Chinese) there is a grudging acceptance of other ways of civilizing people than the U.S. envisions; but the U.S. is not particularly happy that Frontier Situations have a way of running up against very different civilized people than itself. And when the U.S. does run up against a civilized place beyond frontier, such as running up against Mexico in 19th century, it simultaneously defeats frontier people (such as Apache) while declaring to frontier people it provides more freedom than opposition civilization (in our analogy, Mexico).
So we can probably expect similar operation in every Frontier Situation, and in Afghanistan something of romance of Apache wars while trying to keep at bay influence of challenging civilizations (Russia, China, Iran, India). Afghanistan is certainly a romance. You can't help wondering if somewhere out there there's a Navajo Fortress Rock, Tselaa, deep in an Asian Canyon de Chelly.
1
@Daniel12 -- " Afghanistan . . . reminds me of Indian wars in the U.S., especially trying to defeat/civilize/pacify the Apache, Navajo tribes."
Yes, but we did not pacify them. We murdered them. The survivors that made it to the Rez were a tiny number compared to the original population.
Afghanistan is too many people for that. We can't murder them all. The Soviets tried that, with explosive toys and mass bombing and much else. Even their murderous ways could not kill enough of the Afghans.
We can't kill our way out of Afghanistan, so it is entirely unlike the Indian Wars.
2
The American ruling class loathes the truth and will go to great lengths to suppress it. The greatest war crimes are not the crimes themselves but the act of exposing them - see the case of Julian Assange. I can’t recall this or any other major media outlet right or left defending him, but rather demonizing him - a rare point of bipartisan unity. Whatever else he may have done, whether or not he is a good or bad person, his fundamental crime was exposing truths about the horror of these endless wars to which American society has become largely indifferent or resigned.
8
There is a common strain of wishful thinking that runs through some comments here: that if we had a conscript army, we would feel more pain and therefore withdraw from quagmire military conflicts more quickly.
Vietnam is often cited as an example, but forgotten is the level of casualties we sustained, sometimes four or five hundred in a single week. And even then, the war and the lies dragged on for almost two decades at one level or another.
If killing huge numbers of our children with little to show for the sacrifice ever worked to stop wars, we would have stopped after WWI. But war has flourished even when the king and his generals led the charge into battle.
I don't have the answer, but killing draftees as an anti-war strategy is not going to work.
9
@MaxM46 O But they are still children - but just poorer segment ones. IF the drat were fair, with no spurs-exceptions etc, the deaths would affect all strata of society and protest would arise faster.
1
@MaxM46 -- A draft would create a less effective army, made up of people we don't care about, people we'd freely kill. Many are in prison now, or cycled through, their lives thrown away anyway. That is who we have in the world's largest prison system.
Perhaps our government is acting without consent of the governed? Or are we so jaded that we accept that as fact as long as it's some other person's kid who dies for nothing?
And then when the lucky survivor gets home (with a generous helping of PTSD) we can 'thank them for their service' which thus fulfills our personal obligation to the war effort.
Does anyone see how Orwellian this whole concept is?
30
@Keith
Our government does as it wishes. Our consent is immaterial.
This is why Congress has not declared war - as required by our Constitution - since 1942 when we expanded our declaration of war to minor Axis powers in Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria.
Ross, Vietnam is the only country we ever left after we invaded. Think about it. We have massive military installations in Germany, Japan, Italy and South Korea. We have over 900 bases worldwide, but not one of them is in Vietnam. And look how Vietnam today turned out after we were thrown out of there in 1975. Is Vietnam in worse shape today, than it would have been if we had never have left? I hardly think so.
22
@SparkyTheWonderPup MUCH of the military power exists to protect trade. As it always has. THAT is why it makes sense to tax the business class at hugely higher rates on income and wealth.
8
@SparkyTheWonderPup -- We are now moving back into Vietnam. We didn't "leave" we just moved around a bit. It is the same in the Philippines, where we are back, and in Australia, where we were much smaller but are now moving in far greater numbers.
In today's Washington Post there is a report on Amazon and Microsoft executives arguing for closer cooperation between the tech giants and the defense establishment.
Result of course will be even more powerful corporate interests lining up at the defense trough, making it even less likely that there will be money for education, health care, infrastructure, the environment, and the social safety net. We'll keep being told we can't afford it. "Oh, if only France would pay its share..."
And the tech industry controls social media where our news and opinions increasingly are formed.
Space Force? Only when the defense establishment cleans up its act. Until then, we shouldn't give them a dime more. Not even to give Feds parental leave, which, btw, plays into Republican hands, but I digress.
10
@Thomas -- "Oh, if only France would pay its share..."
Its share of what? Defending Europe from the Red Army of Stalin? Putin has only a few brigades, that send handfuls of little green men into marginal zones.
The demand is for auxiliary battalions to supplement the US Army's adventures all over the world, far away from Europe.
Nothing focusses the mind of a parent as well as the prospect of their 18 year-old child being drafted for combat. The most egalitarian idea ever, shared sacrifice in action. Some children escaped through deferments or incapacity (real or imagined, Bone Spurs), but most families were subject to the possibility of the draft. Today, people toss off a "thank you for your service" as tritely as any other greeting, because they have no idea what sacrifice such service actually requires.
Endless wars will remain a fact of life for us until the pain of real shared sacrifice returns to our society.
22
A few reasons stand out for the apparent acceptance of the never ending war:
1. no draft.
2. relatively low casualties - this sounds obscene since any casualty, especially for a doomed strategy, is a tragedy.
3. fears of terrorism create some sense that the middle east wars are doing something defensive - taking the fight to the terrorists. This is unlike Vietnam, where no-one felt the Viet Cong were any sort of threat to the US homeland.
4. Afghanistan, Iraq, Syrian no-fly zones, the Lebanon barracks attack, Algeria. Ask 100 people randomly chosen in the US to explain the differences in the reasons for our military involvement, and the scale of our operations, and see how many people get the history right. It's sad but true, I think, that the sheer number and complexity of the issues have created a sort of giant muddle in the mind of the American public.
9
@NUB Indeed relatively low casualties in terms of death. BUT, in Vietnam the technology was not available to SAVE lives as it is today. So today the rate of severe INJURY and subsequent disability is much higher > my conjecture is that if you add up the death and severe disability count/ rate there is little difference between Vietnam and Afghanistan/ Iraq etc. casualty rates.
5
@Tamza In Vietnam, the dead/severe wounded ratio was about 3:1. Today it is 10:1. Those extra 7 are largely those so severely wounded that they would have died.
Did you know that we have facilities hidden around the US with whole populations of severely wounded? They are brain damaged, or have lost so many body parts they cannot be independent.
This is not exactly secret. It has even featured in novels, even in simple thrillers like the Jack Reacher series in which he encounters one while looking into salvage of damaged military vehicles.
Where are the sympathetic write ups of these places and these people?
Why don't we hear and care? No, it is not "secret" just not a subject of polite conversation either.
@NUB The real reason is this:
The lies that have kept us mired in these useless wars are not the apathy of the public but rather the complicity of the mass media in covering up 9/11 Truth. That mother of all conspiracies provided the pretext for these wars in the first place.
We John and Jane Q Public people have no desire to take self sacrificial action to oppose these wars knowing that you media mavens will mock misrepresent and malign us.
When you repent of your complicity with the great 9/11 Terror Charade, then and only then will we take action.
Until then, we will regard you as the Whoreporate Mess Media and Enemies of the Truth and our Souls.
Ross it's not the lies that kept us in Afghanistan, it's the scoffing by pundits etc... at people who spotted them from the get-go that kept us in Afghanistan. You might think you are spotting a lack of sufficient outrage but what you are seeing is a change from the baseline outrage that began early on that you and those with your political needs chose to ignore.
13
@APS -- I'm the last guy to defend the politics of Douthat, but this one is not so much on him and his.
Where is the opposition? What have they said for the last 15 years and more?
I'll tell you -- the worst, most blood soaked candidate available ran last time as the Democrat who lost. Why Her? Because of that. She served those interests, and took their money.
Like another commenter here noted, Afghanistan has mostly been at war throughout its history. However, it has never been conquered either. I remember when the Russians invaded and all around me were bemoaning the fate of the poor Aghans. But I kept thinking that the Russians had met their Vietnam. None of history's juggernauts have conquered Afghanistan. Not Alexander the Great, not the Romans, not the British, not the Russians, and certainly not us.
29
More distractions from our longest and continuing war on planet earth. And part of this war on earth is our continuing show that capitalism triumphs over communism in how best to bring the good things to life. After Viet Nam, Desert Storm, Afghanistan, and Iraq, please tell me: how is it that we won the cold war? And how is that all these fiascos are not seen as great opportunity costs, diverting us from our most important war -- getting off of fossil fuels?
11
I looked up a bit of Afghanistan history. The area has almost always been at war, either within or without. Maybe we should just leave them to it and stop interfering? A la Starfleet's Prime Directive.
9
@bittenbyknittin -- By the same standards, it could be said of the US that it "has almost always been at war, either within or without."
Don't blame the victim.
The story is not that the government lied about Afghanistan. Governments ALWAYS lie about war. The real story is that a gullible corporate media parroted these lies for well over a decade!
If the corporate media cared more about critically reporting the facts on the ground than about having *access* to power and getting that *embedded* flack jacket photo op, we might have known how bad things were when it was early enough to do something about them.
The story of the War on Terror remains a story about the failure of the 4th estate.
27
I don't agree with every single thing Douthat says here, but this is an interesting and perceptive piece.
5
The sooner you learn that the people have zero say in what your government does in YOUR name the better. Our government is run by corporations.
Military suppliers keep us in perpetual war.
The people want peace and use the trillions on us not them.
Oil companies keep us on fossil fuels.
The people want clean energy.
The medical industries want us paying the highest prices for healthcare and drugs.
The people just want affordable healthcare.
People want to send their kids to get higher education.
Colleges want your children as slaves to their loan dept.
Wall Street cooks the loan rates and has access to free taxpayer money to charge you whatever they want. They can break the law millions of times with no jail.
Every aspect of our lives is now run by a large monopolistic corporations.
I don't know how we get out of this without massive civil unrest and war. Can we start over and build a government that works for the people again?
132
@gene
Douthat gives as cynical an assessment of our political system as I’ve ever seen. It shows that the American experiment with representative democracy is a failure - an ongoing sham. We are living in an illusion sustained by propaganda – soaring patriotic myths. Our sweat, blood, hard work and tax dollars are being funneled into the pockets of profiteers while we sing the National Anthem. Meanwhile our streets, schools and health system crumble.
In their fear of a strong central government the founders created a complex and conflicted system of checks and balances that is slow to respond to the needs of the people, and which, by virtue of its complexity, is ripe for manipulation by those seeking power and profit. WE THE PEOPLE are out of the loop. In our political system a single man, a Mitch McConnell, can shut down the entire legislative process by holding up bills. We have afforded corporations the rights of people, and given them the green light to buy elections and to write legislation.
Democracy requires an informed citizenry who are actively engaged with the process. In the absence of that, individuals with self-serving motives will step in and manipulate the process to their advantage. That’s why war rages on.
Our myths, like religion, are an opiate, a Trojan horse that admits the enemy into our midst. Our fate won’t magically be rescued by myth; it is forged by our will – or lack of.
Ben Franklin warned: we have “a republic, if you can keep it."
Vote.
18
The fundamental problem was summarized by Daniel Patrick Moynihan. No officer corps has ever lost a war. The politicians who should be over ruling them and concentrating on cutting our losses should long ago have wound up the fiascoes in Afghanistan and Iraq (which were largely the product of American jingoistic domestic politics) but won't because they won't confess the truth.
8
@John -- "No officer corps has ever lost a war."
The Japanese officer corps demanded, started, and lost the China and then Pacific Wars. There are other examples.
I don't think the US officer corps has ever been so totally on board with these wars.
I think our present wars originated elsewhere in the US government. Specifically, they originated in our political class that makes up the permanent staff of the bureaucracy and of the Members and Committees of the House and Senate, and of their waiting grounds in think tanks.
They are responding to money, the money that placed them there, and holds more ever in readiness.
.....smart article.
Violence is nearly a given even amongst fellow citizens living in the same country in nation/states across the globe
The absence of war and violence would mean more opportunities for citizens to employ peace and love in their lives. We all love our kids, and we all love 'home'.
The violence being visited on the Muslims in China, against the citizens of Mexico, in Yemeni, the saber rattling between Pakistan and India, and the tensions between Israel and Palestine, are telling us a story.
The tribe is dead. We insist that our faux boundaries on this planet are sacrosanct, while continuing to obliterate the biological connections we have to this planet.
Natural resources are the number one reason we engage in warfare against fellow citizens, followed by the threat ruling autocrats feel from what they determine to be a credible attack on their authority and power.
Mr. Douthat is correct in how our current engagement is Afghanistan is like a low grade fever; enough to make us feel not 'quite right' about this war, and not enough for us to try and stop it.
Step back, and see how many conflicts are occurring, how many are about 'tribe', the firepower that is armed and ready to 'shoot', and understand the reality that climate change is worsening the prospects for food production while increasing the likelihood of immigration across our planet.
$2 trillion dollars in Afghanistan is a lot of money. It could have been our down payment for the future.
8
Afghanistan has evolved into a large scale live-fire training area which has allowed us to create a large body of battle trained troops. This is either very efficient of us or shocking. Maybe both.
6
@BR -- They are trained in light infantry tactics using overwhelming fire support against a far inferior competitor.
This has distorted the evolution of our forces, and the viewpoints of those training them.
If we need an image of what this has created, it is the MRAP, a huge lightly armored truck to be used against IED's but helpless against an opponent who might have its own vehicles, its own fire support, its own serious anti-tank weapons.
It is the image of a bully, ripe for a take down by a peer competitor.
We've seen the movie. A bully swaggers on screen, until the hero of the movie comes in and floor him. We are now that bully, not that hero.
I think you underestimate the quiet outrage of people like me who are appalled at the trillion dollar price tag (so far) of this war - if you think I and others will be ok if this "loss" is cut back to a few hundred billion more per year you are wrong. We need schools, roads, bridges, water systems, dams etc etc. If employment is the issue let's put the people who are working on "war" to work on public projects as happened after the end of the last big war. That infrastructure is breaking down now.
94
@E Campbell -- That quiet outrage has started to produce some election outcomes that cannot be explained within the narrative of our power brokers. So they make excuses, more lies really.
The first flush of those surprise outcomes have been lame, and in many ways dangerous. However, what is important is that voters are rebelling in the only ways they can.
@E Campbell
Hmmm. Outrage over money, none over bloodshed and death? How very American.
4
@E Campbell
You realize the important word in your comment is "quiet", don't you?
A common mindset, shared by Douthat, says that the American Revolution initiated a wholly new approach to governance and social justice. But some of the Founders were slave owners, and "We the People" consisted only of wealthy white men. Power was transferred from one ruling group to another without ever passing through the hands of the people. War has been a constant from the beginning of the USA. To imagine that it is something new is mind-boggling. And oppression of peoples has been a constant, from enslaved Africans to persecuted Original tribes. (BTW: been to Wounded Knee recently?) Andrew Jackson and Kit Carson? Mexico! Philippines! Vietnam. The War on Terror simply codified the non-stop wars of the USA. The truth about staying in Afghanistan is that it's a fine training ground for men, test ground for weapons, and a need for constant replenishment war materiel. Only when the proverbial "complex" says so, will America leave.
19
@Des Johnson
Well said.
We accepted unwinnable wars and endless stalemates a long time before Vietnam. We call it Korea. There are currently 28,000 American troops stationed in South Korea. I did my tour of duty along the DMZ in 1979, 40 years ago, and believe me, it was very much a stalemated war then. Here we 40 years later from when I served, and North Korea has nuclear missiles, a totalitarian regime, and no indication that there will be a peace treaty anytime soon, and no reason to believe the Korean War hostilities will ever really end.
We talk about pulling out of Afghanistan or Iraq, how about we pull out of South Korea, and then maybe Japan and Germany?
11
@SparkyTheWonderPup
Your equivalence is totally false. Yes the Korean war was a draw but it allowed the subsequent development of SK as a thriving member of the world economy and US ally just as the presence of US troops did the same in Japan and Germany. The comparisons of the fiascoes in Afghanistan and Iraq with SK, Germany and Japan is bizarre.
1
The reason Americans don’t care about the war crimes committed in our name by our military ordered by our political leaders are:
1. No draft, therefore no collective public engagement or stake in the outcome
2. We don’t see our pockets getting picked. 2-3 trillion dollars wasted in Afghanistan alone. Taxpayer funds that could have been put to productive use.
3. The US media doesn’t report the ruinous aftermath, only the invasion and subjugation.
4. Americans have been brainwashed to view the military as heroes defending our freedoms, when in reality they are attacking countries that don’t threaten us on behalf narrow geopolitical interests ordered by bad actors and private corporations.
5. Hollywood has been co-opted, all the movies about Afghanistan and Iraq portray Americans as hero’s, the reckoning will only come decades later.
6. Most Americans are incurious about complexities of geography and history shaping countries we attack. Places far away. Again, the media encourages this isolationist and centric viewpoint.
84
@Xoxarle
Welcome to Huxley's Brave New World - a scientific dictatorship where people are conditioned to embrace their servitude. And just in case the psychological conditioning doesn't work, the violence and brutality of Orwell's 1984 waits in the wings.
We have an outstanding propaganda system in place with a captive media that only rarely reports the truth (like now) as a 'safety valve' to give us the illusion that our Republic is intact. But don't expect any change or challenge to what's occurring.
Look at how the 'Occupy' movement was crushed for questioning the financial bail out of Wall Street.
5
@Xoxarle
Absolute zero instruction in US public schools for Theology and History...a coincidence?? (And, no "social studies" is not History)
2
After Vietnam, we created an all-volunteer military. It has become our own foreign legion. It should be no surprise that government military and civilian officials have lied about Afghanistan. Is there anyone who has not known that the war there has been a failure?
There has been no public outcry about the war in Afghanistan because the public is not much affected. No one is being drafted and forced to fight, so we go on about our business, making ourselves feel better by granting our active duty military the privilege of early boarding on flights and saluting the military and veterans every chance we get. We resignedly send military parents off on "deployments," salving our consciences by tellng ourselves that they chose "to serve."
For all the windy cries about how Trump has violated his oath to protect the Constitution, we don't ever admit to ourselves that Congress and the voters long ago violated it much more grievously by granting to presidents virtually unlimited war-making power and by funding the military so generously in order to "defend our freedom." Who cares, as long as "they" don't make anyone fight.
Sic transit democracy.
44
@2REP -- "Is there anyone who has not known that the war there has been a failure?"
Interesting question.
We knew they were lies. We never believed it.
Yet the lies kept coming. They kept being repeated and defended in our major media.
And what came from that? It was almost the same as if we had believed, when in fact we never believed it.
There is a strong tendency in the US to want to withdraw from the world. It's expressed in the peace movements and also in the protectionism that we see in international trade. It exists on both the right and the left. Many of the peaceniks are honorable people with admirable motives.
Given that context, I think we should be talking about the politicization of the military. It's one thing to be thankful for service; it's quite something else to idealize the military no matter what they do. It's been a long time since we crossed the line.
I believe that public opinion polls have found that people have more confidence in the military than in other government institutions. Will the information in the newest report tarnish that reputation? Will we actually begin to question the utility of the vast amounts we spend on the military?
9
The U.S. hasn't "won" a war since WWII, and that was with the help of a lot of allies. There was a clear, existential enemy against whom we all fought, and rightly so.
Since then it's been one loss after another. Perhaps the 1st Gulf war was a sort-of success, but it actually led to the instability (and lies) that led to Iraq and Afghanistan.
This has been made possible, because Americans consider themselves to be righteous and just and the "bringers of Democracy," to the world. Unfortunately, we have cause far more harm and destruction than we've been of help.
38
@mrfreeze6
What about Panama? Grenada?
@cynicalskeptic Not sure they fit the definition of "war". Maybe expensive live-fire training exercises or akin to the inaccurately refereed Korean Conflict or Police Action (this was a war).
One big difference between Vietnam and Afghanistan is that no attack on the homeland originated from Vietnam. The question of "Why are/were we there?" is front and center with the Vietnam debate. In the case of Afghanistan this is not the case. An attack on our homeland was conceived and organized there, and there is a risk that by pulling out it could happen again.
Everything that comes after that distinction is fair game, but we went for the right reason. Sometimes though, the right reason isn't enough.
8
@Jonathan Sanders We went in to Afghanistan in October, 2001 after al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. Then we distracted ourselves with Iraq. It took us until May, 2011 to finally take down OBL - in Pakistan. We should have left Afghanistan as soon as practical after this goal was met.
18
The 9/11 hijackers were Egyptians and Saudis. Amazing how decades on people still don’t understand this. Did we invade either of those countries in retaliation? No, we just kept selling them arms and supporting their wars of choice or acts of repression at home.
2
@Jonathan Sanders the attack did not come from Afghanistan, if came from a group led by a Saudi, mostly populated and funded by Saudis, who just happened to pass through Afghanistan on their way to their haven in Pakistan. Yes, the Taliban was creating a religiously restricted and potentially violent regime, and Al Queda had some branches there, but please don't suggest that the Afghanis were the masterminds of the attack
At some point, politicians will start asking Americans whether we'd rather have infrastructure that's not crumbling, Medicare for all and affordable college or a disgraceful war. As it becomes harder and harder to articulate the reason to continue the war, it will end. I'd expevt it to come no later than the second term of the next Democratic president.
10
@SAO If our presence in Afghanistan were ended it is doubtful the military budget would drop a penny. The current miserable status quo might be cheaper than the consequence of a sweeping Taliban victory that further destabilizes Pakistan.
Money is not an issue.
@SAO -- That very much depends on which variety of Democratic President we get. The last one on offer wanted more war, not less.
Democrats are divided, and only the half that is opposed by the mainstream media would actually end these wars. Notice how they report on Syria and Ukraine, to see how much they favor new wars, and war in general as a policy choice.
1
I think that after Vietnam a stake was driven through the heart of the anti-war movement by the creation of an all-volunteer and all-
mercenary military and that there will be no meaningful anti-war movement in this country until and unless the draft is re-instated.
62
@aging hippie
Probably true. As long as their are patriotic young people to go off to war and keep the corporations that supply war booming it will go on. When volunteers say enough and quit buying into that then it may change.
1
The problem with our 'voluntary' military is that the rest of us can pretend that all is well while not paying the price.
We have not learned much since we allowed NJ Casinos to leave their lights on making it simple for German U-Boats to torpedo merchant ships off the coast.
7
We were right to go into Afghanistan to go after Bin Laden and Al Quada. And we should have gotten him in Tora Bora and then gotten out.
No foreign country have ever won a war in Afghanistan. Ever. Even if they temporarily got some degree of control there.
More importantly, starting with Viet Nam every single military operation that the United States has engaged in has resulted in a string of lies to the American people. Remember how we were winning against the Viet Cong and the WMD's of Iraq for example.
It is unfortunately reaching the point where the only "safe" option is to disbelieve anything the Government tells us.
29
@John Graybeard -- We could have extradited him. They offered. They made excuses and delayed, but that is the nature of diplomacy.
This was a choice, a US choice.
3
There is not one mention of Afghan casualties in this analyses or that the US presence is not merely ineffective but working against our initial goals. American exceptionalism is succeed and that is beyond sad
6
@DP -- They are not real people to the US mainstream media.
The war was started in order to remove the Taliban from the seat of government in Afghanistan - the Taliban having made the mistake of allowing Osama bin Laden to train his followers there, which led to the 9/11 attack. So if it takes a long-term US presence there to ensure that the same thing doesn't happen again, then maybe that's worth it.
4
@George The war was started on the pretext of getting OBL. If the Taliban got in the way, tough luck! But of course, the real reason was hydrocarbons and the need for regime change. That came when an oil guy was installed as president of "Afghanistan," whereupon Bush took off after Saddam. As for 9/11---the attackers were mostly Saudis, not Taliban. And Al Q and ISIS clones are all over Africa and the Middle East.
8
“War,” in the words of a famous General, “is a racket.” That never changes. What has changed in the last half century is that politics has become a phony war, and a real racket. The GOP ideology that government is an evil to be disabled through “privatization” has become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Politics is now the way the powerful keep us from meddling in our own government. Media divides our allegiances among the powerful, instead of exposing the powerful to our judgment. We express our impotence in never-ending rage against our fellow citizens’ moral failures, instead of exercising our power by taking the reins of democracy.
12
@Martin : That general was Smedly Buttler USMC. Twice the recipient of the Medal of Honor.
9
@USMC1954 -- Yes. He was also the man who put down the Businessman's Coup against FDR, when invited to take military command of it. We have much to thank him for.
It's more than 2 trillion, much more. It's national health insurance, new schools, new universities, housing, infrastructure, clean water and air.
Thank you George W Bush for your gift of death and destruction, you too Obama for not getting is OUT of Afghanistan.
We should bring back the draft so that government and the armed services will not lie to us and waste our children's lives and money without push back from the electorate.
13
So, you support Trump's withdrawal from Kurdish Syria?
The problem is a simple one: faith in government.
Faith - unquestioning faith that is - leads to abuse.
And when those who abuse that faith are never brought to answer, it merely encourages more abuse.
Someone has to pay - other than the American public who have been the ones to pay, through taxes and through foregone improvements to the health-care system in the USA - and most of all, through the contribution of their sons and daughters to serve in disastrous military forays like the one in Afghanistan.
If there are no consequences for those who lied, the lying will continue.
3
We’re cherry picking our foreign military entanglements.
It seems that the consensus among this article’s commentariat is that the US should pull out of an unwinnable war.
I noted last month that the NYT consensus regarding Trump's Syrian pullout was that it’s a travesty for our Kurdish allies, and that we should continue to support them.
Different wars, yes. But wars nonetheless. We have many Afghani allies who are as deserving of protection as the Kurds are. It’s less than obvious why we should support Kurds fighting ISIS but not Afghanis fighting the Taliban.
All of Trump’s many foibles considered, he seems to eschew foreign entanglements. That plays well to his base, who I suspect have a high proportion of kin in the military. They’re the most fatigued of the whole forever war thing.
Trump’s base may turn out to be the most committed peaceniks in the next election.
Careful what you wish for.
8
@Questioner -- These long bad wars of choice have deep roots in the Democratic Party, not just among Republicans. In fact, the neocons of Dubya started out as Jackson Democrats, and went back to support Hillary in the last election.
@Questioner Foibles?
Russ. you ignore some important facts. The origins of our involvement then in Vietnam and now in Afghanistan are totally different. Vietnam resulted from George Kennan's post-World War II containment strategy combined with President Kennedy's pledge "to pay any price" to defend freedom. We are in Afghanistan because the Taliban aided and supported Al Qaeda, and Al Qaeda attacked us on 9/11. You also omit that one reason we are still in Afghanistan is because an ignorant and incurious President George W. Bush decided to initiate a totally unnecessary war against Iraq before the mission in Afghanistan was even close to being accomplished. With an all-volunteer force we simply lack sufficient manpower to do both. The question that remains for Afghanistan is how you define "success" in that country. The answer may not be a popular one. Great Britain helped defend the Omani government against insurgents in the 1950s and still maintains a military presence there. Given the lackluster nature of the Afghan government, victory there may simply be the fact that our continued presence keeps the Taliban in check.
5
@Rick
It’s not our fight. Anyway, I believe that most of the population is in agreement with the Taliban on most issues.
The Afghan War represents the failure of American exceptionalism. Anyone that studies history knows that it is almost impossible to have complete victory on foreign ground, yet US leaders failed to see that reality. At the same time, the war represents the greatness of a representative democracy run mostly with a capitalist economy because unlike the Soviet Union, the US has the power to run forever wars and actually sustain a stalemate.
3
Our military leadership is also behind the continuation of wars for good reason: Impressive titles and promotions to higher rank come with our occupation of foreign territories. Who wants to give that up?
14
The end state has been obvious from the beginning. The Taliban adopted the same basic strategy as Ho Chi Minh, wait until we get tired of it and leave. It will work this time too, eventually. It’s only a question of how much blood, money, and time before we get there. The only thing missing is leaders with the courage to state the obvious and Americans to accept it.
You can win every battle, while losing the war in the absence of a sustainable local political solution. Imagine what we could have done with that $2T we wasted on Afghanistan.
The best thing we could do is leave, today.
13
The great myth that war solves problems has persisted since war was born all those thousands of years ago in the ancient Middle East. We are hardly the only ones who haven't learned this lesson. Every now and again, war probably is necessary, but even then we have failed to recognize or deal with the forces that have brought on those kinds of wars in time to stop them. Robert E Lee put it best as he watched his army destroy the Union forces trying to reach Marye's Heights at Fredericksburg. "It is good war is so terrible, else we would grow to love it too much." We have grown to love it too much.
16
Leading our decades of "deception and denial" are many Presidents, Senate and House members without military service and whose children are far from any harm, claiming false patriotism while hiding behind our honorable soldiers.
53
@johnw Instead of invading Afghanistan in 2001, the US should have paid Taliban to uproot al-Qaida.
But the Bush administration needed an immediate enemy upon whom to exact the revenge for 9/11 that Americans were raging for.
1
"But it’s also possible that in cutting troop numbers the Pentagon is groping toward sustainability rather than an endpoint — toward some figure that’s deemed sufficient to manage stalemate, to preserve certain American objectives and prevent the embarrassment of real defeat."
What objectives, other than a steady, endless revenue stream for military contractors?
35
A more cynical (realistic?) reading of the situation is that endless wars are simply good for certain businesses, who in turn lobby our elected officials; rinse and repeat. For instance, Raytheon and Lockheed Martin stock prices have risen *10-fold* since 9/11:
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/LMT/lockheed-martin/stock-price-history
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/RTN/raytheon/stock-price-history
...and, over the same period, we've spent upwards of $2 trillion in Afghanistan, according to WaPo's reporting. Coincidence? It seems likely that a good chunk of that change fueled turbo-charged those stocks' growth. Worse, I just chose those defense companies out of a hat. How many others made out like gangbusters?
War is a curious business. At the front lines, Americans (and civilians) pay with their lives, or in broken bodies. But at home, many never pay at all--they get paid, handsomely. Why will they want to give that up? Endless wars really do equal endless profits. As long as the trickle of deaths isn't so great as to move the needle of public sentiment, this state of affairs could very well continue indefinitely.
275
@Dwarf Planet As long as there are men and women signing up for these wars, I guess. As long as generals like McCrystal and Petraeus get away with it and are worshipped for it. And as long as there are Senators like McCain who never met a war they didn't like. And yes, the defense contractors.
12
@Dwarf Planet
Yep, it's always the same story: follow the money.
11
@Dwarf Planet
Ever since Hobson wrote "Imperialism" in 1902, some have realized imperial wars are fought because they profit the financial elite, despite being a net cost to the general public.
8
Another problem with our tolerance for war comes from declaring war on an idea, terrorism, more than a state.
47
@Tom
You have to understand that our current series of endless wars was carefully crafted
A war on 'terror' cannot be either won or lost. If the populace loses the will to fight, additional acts of 'terrorism' can reinforce the people's outrage and prolong support for the conflict.
If the war is not covered in the press and kept out of the news, people will ignore it.
Without a draft only 'volunteers' fight so there is less objection to the conflict.
Minimizing combat deaths keeps the conflict low profile. Nevermind the multiple amputations. blindness, brain injuries... as long as the wounded don't die. Suicides later don't get counted as combat deaths.
1
@Tom -- Terrorism is a tactic, not even an idea. We've used the tactic ourselves. As a tactic, it is timeless. It can never be defeated.
As they say, the more things change the more they stay the same. Vietnam redux. And for what, thousands of Americans killed, hundreds of thousands Afghanistan soldiers and civilians, a country in never ending chaos and... trillions thrown into the sands. In our long involvement in Vietnam we never heeded the lessons of the French in Indochina and we repeated the tragic mistake in Afghanistan. Maybe its time to realize we can't impose our will in situations where its not appropriate to do so. Our initial foray into Afghanistan was justified but beyond that we stepped into an unnecessary quagmire. In this case we should have heeded the lessons of another foreign power, the Russians who had the sense to extricate themselves from a war that would never be won.
29
@Horseshoe Crab One difference of opinion: our foray was never justified. We destroyed a country to chase 500 criminals. Seems like bad cost-benefit analysis. Besides, the money and 75% of the recruits came from Saudi Arabia.
6
@Horseshoe Crab Not to mention, the British tried twice and failed to take Afghanistan.
2
@Paul
We want into Afghanistan because the Taliban government and army were protecting al-Qaida and it was the only way to break it up. Although AQ still exists, it's been years since it launched a mass-casualty attack and is sharply weakened. The fact that they cam from Saudi Arabia is irrelevant--they were based in Afghanistan.
America has conducted unwinnable wars before Afghanistan. Or more correctly, as soon as American political leadership realizes a war/conflict is unwinnable, the lies begin. It took a societal revolution to make America end the 16 year Vietnam War and yet the military knew it was unwinnable after the 1968 Tet Offensive.
So why does the United States fight unwinnable wars? President Eisenhower stated the answer. This is same man who a decade earlier was the American general leading the Allies to victory in Europe. Ike warned America; "...we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military–industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted."
Politicians and industrial lobbyists, who will never fight wars, bang the war drum to increase profit-taking. Wars are rarely fought for altruistic reasons and even if they are, profit-taking still takes place. Contrary to Gordon Gecko's creed, "greed is NOT good". In the case of war, it kills the poor while the rich get richer.
150
@Question Everything - Nicely put. Just don't let the American public off the hook for also "banging the war drum". When these wars started there were millions of "support our troops" folks out claiming that questioning the march towards war meant undermining our military families etc.8. At my local VFW there are still folks who loudly state that we lost the Vietnam war because people protested back home. It is easy to blame politicians - but politicians are elected by people who think like them.
14
@Question Everything
Some also think taking every opportunity for war makes us look tough and proves we are a world leader. They always see that as the solution.
3
@Question Everything . Your last sentence... the rich get richer. Prime example here would have been that war monger Cheney and Haliburton.
8
Americans also have been influenced by the Military Myth of heroic Americans fighting for freedom and goodness. We are constantly bombarded by teary eyed flyovers at Athletic events, we thank military personnel for service but few others in the public arena. Yet, there is little evidence that the political wars in which we have engaged since WWII (exceptions perhaps with Korea and Iraq one) were close to that myth. They were projections of military industrial power, little more. Worse they are taking place without real regard for the massive loss of life and maiming of even more of civilians, "enemies", and our own personnel. An "acceptable" level of American casualties means little to the family who has lost a son or daughter. This is no different for the families of civilians combatants on the other side. The crocodile tears of military patriotism should be equalled with tears of remorse for our wars.
194
@HPower Brava! Well said. I have always thought the almost "holy" reverence for the military in the US a bit cloying and overdone. As you stated, there are many other heroic and unsung heroes in service somewhere in America. The other problem is that whenever America undertakes to "save the world" and "give" it democracy, they take our military with them. Our Prime Minister knew this when he refused our military aid when you went to Iraq. To know that we have soldiers who have died supporting your lies about the wars we have fought with alongside you, is appalling and I know our Trudeau will not follow you any longer. We still keep the peace in Afghanistan, and have for 18 years but not much longer.
11
@HPower Yes, exactly! I'm so sick of hearing variations on "They're fighting to protect our freedom" when, as the documents revealed by the Washington Post show, no one can really say what the purpose of US involvement in Afghanistan is. I say this as the son of a US Army Colonel, who was a WW II veteran and is buried at Arlington National Cemetery.
18
@joan williams I teach public school and love the people I teach next to but that pales next to the respect I felt for the Marines I served with in the Middle East. You're not happy with the wars we fight or missions we serve in, take a number. We don't pick and choose our conflicts, we just serve - perhaps another tremendous difference from my previous life and the one I live today.
You want out of Afghanistan, once again I don't blame you, but sounding a little less holier than thou wouldn't hurt. Remembering why we went in there in the first place and who the Taliban were wouldn't be a bad idea either. They still seem kind of "bad".
1
All colonial and imperial wars end poorly for the alien power. The reason is obvious. Regardless of how badly bloodied is the battlefield nation, its citizens have nowhere to go. Eventually the invading power grows weary of fighting on foreign soil and goes home, often proclaiming victory to save face, but go home it must.
Until we learn this difficult lesson, we are bound to get mired down in other foreign wars in other distant lands.
99
The exception to this is if you have an actual settler population or completely re-educate the existing population over the course of several generations. The existence of all the modern countries in the Americas is evidence that it can work on a long or brutal enough time line.
6
@David -- We never convinced the natives. We just killed almost all of them, and exiled the survivors to reservations of despair.
Even genocide does not "work" to take over, except with total destruction.
5
@Bill
Our own war for independence is a sterling example of your point.
3