Except for opium and rubies, there aren't many resources in afghanistan. We're not playing Risk, where we need afghanistan for it's geographical position for a tactical maneuver.
Afghanistan... A stable and reliable ally? When the hell do you expect that to happen?
I disagree. It's an untenable position. The afghans have requested we stay another 10 years. These are people who refuse to get off their asses and help themselves. I saw it every day I was there, they want us to do everything for them, and they still don't want us there.
Sounds like they might want to start doing something for themselves then. There's a difference between us training and supporting their efforts to take back their country, and us playing whack-a-mole in the mountains for 2 decades while we go bankrupt.
You're referring to wars against countries, not an ideology. You and grant foolishly believe that someday we'll have killed the last terrorist, and that'll have just been it. Then we can pack up and go home eh? You have to fix the root cause of terrorism, peel the onion, ask yourself the question: Why do they hate us and wish death upon us? And no, it's not because we're christians and successful.
1.
I was referring to Central Asia as a whole which is quite resource rich, but if we are talking about Afghanistan the country is in fact very well endowed with rare earth metals. Potentially up to $1 trillion in untapped platinum, lithium, tungsten, chromium, etc.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/world/asia/14minerals.html?pagewanted=all But yes, I was referring to Afghanistan as an important geopolitical pivot point for the rest of Central Asia as far as the US is concerned.
2.
I think a reliable and stable Afghanistan is not a fantasy whatsoever. The government can emerge victorious in this fight, and any Afghan government will desire close and strong relations with the US for a variety of security, economic, and strategic reasons.
3.
What evidence do you have of the Afghans not "getting off their asses" to help themselves? More than 12,000 members of the ANSF have been killed over the past 10 years in battles with the Taliban and their Islamist affiliates, and tens of thousands more have been wounded. Weakness and difficulty in the face of a threat is not the same is doing nothing. They face a strong and vigorous minority seeking to overcome a nascent government which due to the violence has never had time to throw down the deep roots a proper state needs.
4.
I am referring to wars against other countries, but also against ideologies. Clearly we did reduce and destroy two cultures and ideologies, and in the case of Japan we even restructured their religion. Are they completely analogous to our present struggles? No, of course not. But it is foolish I think to argue that global Islamist terrorism or its offshoots are impossible to defeat via political, police, and financial pressure wedded with armed confrontation. The Taliban for example is not inexhaustible and can be eroded and suppressed. International terrorist groups can be reduced and driven away or destroyed (see al-Qaeda in Saudi Arabia as a salient example of an organization in disarray and defeat). It is a long term effort globally, with localized campaigns and efforts in places like Yemen, Afghanistan, Mali, etc.
As for why they hate us, that is easy enough to understand and it proves nothing. 'They' nebulous as that sounds, dislike us for our foreign policy, for our culture, for our position as the global hegemon which earns us burning enmity, for their own perceived national and cultural degeneration, for their status at home, etc. However, it doesn't matter to me that they dislike us, anymore than it mattered to the US that Japan hated us for imposing the resource embargo. Just because someone has a grievance with you, does not mean that you have done something that requires atonement. I recognize that Osama Bin Laden (taking one example) bitterly opposed Western intervention in East Timor, strongly opposed our deployment during the Gulf War, believed economic globalization led by the US was threatening Muslim traditionalism, that our alliance with Gulf monarchies was a satanic one, that US support for Israel was a defacto war on Palestinians, etc.
But I don't care. Osama Bin Laden does not dictate US foreign policy, and that he had a violent problem with it is not evidence that the policy was wrong. It is only evidence that there was a fanatical enemy that needed to be dealt with.
It looks so cute.
