Afghanistan: Where Empires (US, USSR) Go To Die

Tomdispatch.com:

It is now a commonplace -- as a lead article in the New York Times's Week in Review pointed out recently -- that Afghanistan is "the graveyard of empires." Given Barack Obama's call for a greater focus on the Afghan War ("we took our eye off the ball when we invaded Iraq..."), and given indications that a "surge" of U.S. troops is about to get underway there, Afghanistan's dangers have been much in the news lately. Some of the writing on this subject, including recent essays by Juan Cole at Salon.com, Robert Dreyfuss at the Nation, and John Robertson at the War in Context website, has been incisive on just how the new administration's policy initiatives might transform Afghanistan and the increasingly unhinged Pakistani tribal borderlands into "Obama's War."

In other words, "the graveyard" has been getting its due. Far less attention has been paid to the "empire" part of the equation. And there's a good reason for that -- at least in Washington. Despite escalating worries about the deteriorating situation, no one in our nation's capital is ready to believe that Afghanistan could actually be the "graveyard" for the American role as the dominant hegemon on this planet.

Read the whole story: Tomdispatch.com

Comments

[ThirdSection]

Empires are expensive to maintain, and they generally wind up benefitting only the wealthy elites. The sooner we bury our pretentions toward empire, the sooner we can get down to the serious and pressing business of rebuilding our republic.

[AlaninElkGrove]

Neutralize or remove the nukes out of Pakistan, declare victory in Afghanistan and get our brave soldiers home...

[Ergon]

Do you think that if that were possible, it wouldn't have been done already? Your 'brave soldiers' are toast, and you need to get to Antiwar.com to read about the rash of Army suicides.

[davidwayneosedach]

This article is right on. The U.S. should bow out of Afgahnistan and let the Euro-zone folks handle it. Especially Sarkohzy.

[gunnerbear]

A Response..­... (pt1)
The 'Euro-Zone folks' were prepared to support US / NATO operations in Afghanistan.

What made it difficult to do so politically was the fact the public in a number of European countries said in effect, "....we will not put more of our troops in, if that means that the US then withdraws a similar number of their troops and moves them to Iraq......­.".

In my opinion, after 9-11, the US had the opportunity, to really build a united coalition against AQ and the Taliban. For one reason or another, the then Administration was not prepared to engage in such a course of action and chose to act in the way that it did. Again, in a number of European capitals, the US invasion of Iraq was seen simply as the US making a grab for oil and an attempt to increase US influence in the region whilst not considering what the breakup of Iraq could result in.

In particular the Turks did not want Iraq broken up resulting in a de facto Kurdish state in the north of Iraq that could then be used as base by the PKK that the PKK could then use to attack Turkey's border region.

[gunnerbear]

Some Thoughts..­......(Pt2­)

Of course the US was perfectly free to act in this way but it put certain European governments in a hopeless position of asking their people to endorse nation building in Afghanistan whilst condoning the actions of NATO's leader in Iraq.

I agree that certain European nations should be willing to take on more of the burden but at the present time that is not a popular course of action but it may become one as the US dis-engages itself from Iraq and more realistic goals are set by the political leadership of NATO.

[PADDYWHACK]

Excellent on point article,the Empire is terminal.A few years of grand scale larceny and stupid foreign policy was all it took.The army will be needed here to keep order,so Afghanistan will not be an issue for long.

[RoloTomassi]

Look on the bright side; the detention centers are all ready to go!

[RoloTomassi]

There was never a sane motivation for war--in Afghanistan or Iraq--but this economic disaster is surely a sane reason to end them, and quickly.

Had we pursued a covert operation effort in the ME, I suspect we'd have made much more progress in tracking down actual terrorists who attacked us, rather than create a whole new generation of terrorists. Because of our misguided efforts, there are now likely thousands of people in the ME who have lost innocent family members and friends, and who live for the day when they'll have an opportunity to strike a blow against the "evil empire."

I swear, a person has to be ignorant or delusional to think there is anything to be gained by continuing to wage war in Afghanistan; every day we are there we only dig our hole deeper....

[Chaucea]

"...no one in our nation's capital is ready to believe that Afghanistan could actually be the "graveyard" for the American role as the dominant hegemon on this planet."

Ah yes, and that audacity right there has been the downfall of empires past.

[NoCents]

Let me see. We stand on a Plant that is spinning at 2000 mph in a solar system spinning at 200,000 mph.

And we we worry about Nation States. The Laws of Nature and Natures GOD spoken with the same intellect as Thomas Jefferson.

http://www.yogananda-srf.org/writings/world.html

[orangepetal]

I would focus strongly on terror threats to America, while also helping local Afghani or Pakistani law enforcement efforts to achieve their own local security interests and goals. I presume the military is considering many scenarios and outcomes. I do not feel there is much public support for a long war in Afghanistan now, but I CBW. At the same time hostility should not be misread or taken lightly.