Share

A War of Absurdity

by: Robert Scheer, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed

photo
(Photo Illustration: Lance Page / t r u t h o u t; Adapted From: soldiersmediacenter / flickr)

    There is no indication that any of the contending forces in Afghanistan, including the Taliban, are interested in bringing al-Qaida back. On the contrary, all the available evidence indicates that the Arab fighters are unwelcome and that it is their isolation from their former patrons that has led to their demise.

    Every once in a while, a statistic just jumps out at you in a way that makes everything else you hear on a subject seem beside the point, if not downright absurd. That was my reaction to the recent statement of the president's national security adviser, former Marine Gen. James Jones, concerning the size of the terrorist threat from Afghanistan:

    "The al-Qaida presence is very diminished. The maximum estimate is less than 100 operating in the country, no bases, no ability to launch attacks on either us or our allies."

    Less than 100! And he is basing his conservative estimate on the best intelligence data available to our government. That means that al-Qaida, for all practical purposes, does not exist in Afghanistan -- so why are we having a big debate about sending even more troops to fight an enemy that has relocated elsewhere? Because of the blind belief, in the minds of those like John McCain, determined to "win" in Afghanistan, that if we don't escalate, al-Qaida will inevitably come back.

    Why? It's not like al-Qaida is an evil weed indigenous to Afghanistan and dependent on its climate and soil for survival. Its members were foreign imports in the first place, recruited by our CIA to fight the Soviets because there were evidently not enough locals to do the job. After all, U.S. officials first forged the alliance between the foreign fighters and the Afghan mujahideen, who morphed into the Taliban, and we should not be surprised that that tenuous alliance ended. The Taliban and other insurgents are preoccupied with the future of Afghanistan, while the Arab fighters couldn't care less and have moved on to more hospitable climes.

    There is no indication that any of the contending forces in Afghanistan, including the Taliban, are interested in bringing al-Qaida back. On the contrary, all the available evidence indicates that the Arab fighters are unwelcome and that it is their isolation from their former patrons that has led to their demise.

    As such, while one wishes that the Afghan people would put their houses in order, these are not -- even after eight long years of occupation -- our houses. Sure, there are all sorts of angry people in Afghanistan, eager to pick fights with each other and most of all any foreigners who seem to be threatening their way of life, but why should that any longer have anything to do with us?

    Even in neighboring Pakistan, the remnants of al-Qaida are barely hanging on. As The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday, "Hunted by U.S. drones, beset by money problems and finding it tougher to lure young Arabs to the bleak mountains of Pakistan, al-Qaida is seeing its role shrink there and in Afghanistan, according to intelligence reports and Pakistan and U.S. officials. ... For Arab youths who are al-Qaida's primary recruits, 'it's not romantic to be cold and hungry and hiding,' said a senior U.S. official in South Asia."

    It's time to declare victory and begin to get out rather than descend deeper into an intractable civil war that we neither comprehend nor, in the end, will care much about. Terrorists of various stripes will still exist as they have throughout history, but the ones we are most concerned about have proved mighty capable of relocating to less hostile environments, including sunny San Diego and Southern Florida, where the Sept. 11 hijackers had no trouble fitting in.

    There is a continued need for effective international police work to thwart the efforts of a widely dispersed al-Qaida network, but putting resources into that effort does not satisfy the need of the military establishment for a conventional field of battle.

    That is the significance of Gen. Stanley McChrystal's leaked report calling for a massive counterinsurgency campaign to make everything right about life in Afghanistan, down to the governance of the most forlorn village. The general's report aims not at eliminating al-Qaida, which he concedes is barely existent in the country, but rather at creating an Afghan society that is more to his own liking.

    It is a prescription, as the Russians and others before them learned, for war without end. That might satisfy the marketing needs of the defense industry and the career hopes of select military and political aspirants, but it has nothing to do with fighting terrorism. In the end, it would seem that some of our leaders need the Afghanistan battleground more than the terrorists do.

  

»


Robert Scheer is editor of truthdig.com, where this column originally appeared. E-mail Robert Scheer at rscheer@truthdig.com. Copyright 2009 Creators.com

Comments

This is a moderated forum. Β It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

"In the end, it would seem

"In the end, it would seem that some of our leaders need the Afghanistan battleground more than the terrorists do." Elegant, perfect and of course exactly right.

What is win ? Fascist

What is win ? Fascist amerika is the biggest loser in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan ! Its imperialistic slaughter in 3 innocent nations poisons the very heart of its people and drags the empire further down the slippery slope of failed empire!

The Taliban aren't an

The Taliban aren't an indigenous tribal force they were created as a "kind of Frankenstein monster" to outdo Iran's extreme Shiite mullahs by the CIA and ISI. Even before 9/11, they had a reputation for child kidnapping, murder, assassination and stripping women of their basic human rights. Their only popular base of support are Pashtuns, which make up 38% of Afghanistan and even not a majority of Pashtuns support them. The Taliban had a habit of ethnic cleansing as well. We made Afghanistan what it is today, and have to eliminate all the influences in it from other countries' grand designs.

Afghanistan in its current

Afghanistan in its current form, is a creation of the failed "end game" following the Russian withdrawal. And its not the fault of America alone. Western powers stood aside and let things there go down the drain. Now... its up to those same powers to fix what they broke in the first place. To just leave now, would sentence innumerable people to torture, execution, and unimaginable treatment. Heaven knows what sinister product this would produce. It might make Al Qaida looks positively pastoral. It's never going to be a western country, but we cannot leave these poor people to the wolves yet again. If we do, we will only have ourselves to blame for what comes next. A harsh lesson. but one which we will never learn. To avoid problems in the future, refrain from breaking things in the present. Its very, very expensive and difficult to fix, if indeed fixing it is even possible.

'..some of our leaders need

'..some of our leaders need the Afghan battleground more than the terrorists do' is the major part of the conservative 'divide & conquer' domestic tactic to the american public so as to accomplish their control & the 2nd WORST reason being our country's energies are diverted & drained for+ 8 years by multiple wars--this is why we can't afford healthcare for all americans, etc,etc...

'..some of our leaders need

'..some of our leaders need the Afghan battleground more than the terrorists do' is the major part of the conservative 'divide & conquer' domestic tactic to the american public so as to accomplish their control & the 2nd WORST reason being our country's energies are diverted & drained for+ 8 years by multiple so-called "wars"--this is why we can't afford healthcare for all americans, etc,etc... just a way to keep all people miserable & dominated by them--the way this proves true is none of these prowar leaders & families are in the war!!!All these prowar conservatives can enlist or get a commission --no one prevents them.

As Americans, we were deeply

As Americans, we were deeply offended by the actions of the Taliban long before 9-11. But we didn't go to war against their country because they were assaulting the symbols of other religions and societies. That just is not the mission of the United States as defined in the Preamble to our Constitution, "To provide for the common defense". We attacked the Taliban so that our Bush Administration could appear to be responding to 9-11. We seem to be chasing Bin Ladn in Afghanistan, though we are aware he's not there. If this Administration continues and expands the invasion of a tragically poor country that has done us no harm, it can only be because the President's advisers have convinced him it's politically necessary to keep up the illusion that we are there for a moral purpose. We never needed another Vietnam and we need to stop this destructive madness.

We never needed another

We never needed another Vietnam and we need to stop this destructive madness.

But then, what "we" need or don't need was never really a consideration, but only a convenient way to lie about why "we" need to do things that are obviously against our own interests (not to mention against our own putative standards of moral conduct).

Al Qaida is a pretext. Just

Al Qaida is a pretext. Just like in 1953, ingerence in Afghanistan is purely for oil. How comes both hamid Karzai and Zalmai Khalizad were UNOCAL officials? If you still doubt, read or re-read Pepe Escobar's "Pipelinistan" or his more recent "Obama does Globalistan". "In the end, it would seem that some of our leaders need the Afghanistan battleground more than the terrorists do." Well, yes, but the in "battleground" the most important part is "ground" to run pipelines.

This country's "leaders"

This country's "leaders" have Always created our "enemies", starting with the indigonist peoples right here. "WE" have always been welcomed everywhere we go UNTIL we rob and slaughter them. Suddenly, out of a clear blue sky, they become our enemies. Geeze, have to wonder why... ~John L.

To quote the immortal Stan

To quote the immortal Stan Freberg: What this "We", White Man?