I had to put my newspaper down the other day after reading an article about six brave soldiers who recently joined the ranks of the "forever young" after an improvised explosive device went off in Afghanistan May 26, 2010. It's been a long 10 years.
War is not for the fainthearted, nor is it for the impatient. I am guilty on both counts, but believe I am not alone in my feelings as I come to understand that the cost of war expands far beyond America's diminishing treasure; our blood investment must indeed reap benefits beyond an "an eye for an eye." We are better than that.
With scant media reports about the positive impacts of our presence in Afghanistan, it's easy to fall prey to a feeling of hopelessness regarding our operations there. A cursory glance at Afghanistan seems to project a dysfunctional nation infested with godless, faceless, soulless lunatics who will stop at nothing to "kill all infidels." This type of generalization makes us worse than our enemy - because we know better.
It is far too easy to politicize a war. Those who believe that we should "cut and run," reveal their own cowardice and give no thought to the ramifications thereof - the certain and absolute loss of untold innocent lives. Think: Cambodia Vietnam. Now is not the time for Tuesday morning water cooler discussions about what could've, should've or would've been done yesterday. We are where we are, and must see things as they are - today. We must also see the faces of real Afghanis trying to make a difference.
"Skin" in advertising sells magazines the same way bad news sells newspapers. I had to search far and wide for good news regarding our military presence in Afghanistan, and found it at a little known website at goodafghannews.com:
• This spring, 32 Afghan students, including eight women, made history as the first graduating class of American University of Afghanistan. Ambassador to Afghanistan, Karl Eikenberry, gave the keynote speech, and a video message recorded by former First Lady Laura Bush, well-known for her work to promote equality and quality of life for Middle East women, was played during the ceremony.
• New schools and universities are not the only things to sprout up throughout Afghanistan. New hospitals and airports are in process as well as the rebuilding of canal systems and wells that were utterly destroyed during the Soviet invasion in the 1980s. Once rebuilt, Afghanistan will have the ability to provide food, water, health care and transportation for its people, and boost its economy with new jobs and exports.
• The beverage industry in Afghanistan is growing at 30 percent annually and PepsiCo is building a $60 million plant in Kabul to distribute Pepsi products, which will create 800 additional jobs.
Although it seems that for every step forward, we take two back, in reality, we are slowly winning Afghani hearts and minds. The International Council on Security and Development completed a recent survey of 1,400 representatives throughout Afghanistan that found our military achievements "unquestionable," with the majority believing that NATO and the Afghan government are "winning the war."
Enjoying a cold Pepsi in Kabul or a woman graduating from college cannot make up for the loss of a single soldier's life, but these events remind us, and the Afghan populace we're not just there to kill Bin Laden, we're there to save a people from the grip of the savages among them who checked out of humanity a long time ago. And for that, the sacrifice is not in vain.
Getting lost in the darkness of war has a tendency to overshadow its purpose, and sometimes we need to be reminded why it is good to take the next step forward. In his "Lord of the Rings" trilogy, author J.R.R. Tolkien amply explained "why," when his character, Sam, encouraged his buddy Frodo to continue in the fight. Tolkien wrote, "By rights we shouldn't even be here. But we are... It is only a passing thing, this shadow... A new day will come... There's some good in this world... and it's worth fighting for."
• Susan Stamper Brown is a nationally syndicated columnist and can be reached at writestamper@gmail.com
sockratties posted at 1:35 pm on Tue, May 31, 2011.
I believe the author is even more off the mark than usual. Disagreeing with a political system or the way a society treats its own people is not a good enough reason for invading it or we would have to invade half the countries we do business with. And, yes we did invade Afghanistan. People have been invading Afghanistan for centuries and Afghanis have always managed to resist. They consider us another uninvited guest. Some make money off of us. Some use us to keep them in power. All consider us invaders.
We originally invaded Afghanistan to prevent the Taliban from providing safe haven to al Qaeda, then we got into nation building. Remember who got us there? Who thinks of this as a modern crusade? Who are our empire builders? Who wants to be sure China and Russia don’t get to the lithium deposits first?
If we’re not there to kill Taliban (the religious crusade reason) and not there to kill bin Laden (the completed political objective reason) and we’re not there to make our rich and powerful, richer and more powerful (the empire building reason), why are we there? We don’t need to keep 100,000 soldiers in a country just to ensure that our unwilling hosts have a supply of soda pop and a few token graduates. Susan Stamper Brown needs to look a little farther than selected survey results and listening to a taped pep talk from a previous first lady.
Ms. Brown quotes Tolkien: "By rights we shouldn't even be here. But we are... It is only a passing thing, this shadow... A new day will come... There's some good in this world... and it's worth fighting for." What is it in Afghanistan that we’re still fighting (and dying) for?
Dale Whiting posted at 3:32 pm on Tue, May 31, 2011.
Ms. Brown needs to ask herself the question "Why does the Taliban hate us?" then get some clues as to the multiple answers. 1st, we are an invading force, a foreign occupier, one who saw to the election of our hand picked president. 2nd, in our efforts to defeat the major political force in what has been, is and likely always will be a system of loosely affiliated tribes, we act as if we, not our hand picked president, is in charge. 3rd, we target the local Taliban forces very loosely, causing countless "collateral damage," the euphemism for deaths and injuries of innocent non-combatant civilians, many being women and children.
Her "good news from Afghanistan" just does not offset any of this bad news. And all of the good intentions in the world do not make it right! When Karzai finally does tell us to leave, he having to make his own arrangements to leave first, we had better cut and run. Those we leave behind will suffer. That will be our fault, too.
Ms. Brown is a naive "Nation builder." And Nation building is just another form of empire building. We get to choose what happens, not the nation we would build.
Slabside posted at 7:36 pm on Tue, May 31, 2011.
Bush invading Afghanistan = BAD
Obama continuing to occupy Afghanistan = GOOD
wdgnas posted at 5:29 am on Wed, Jun 1, 2011.
Bush invading Afghanistan = BAD
Obama continuing to occupy Afghanistan = BAD
at a cost of 2 billion per week...
Dale Whiting posted at 8:59 am on Wed, Jun 1, 2011.
Oh my! Now wdngas and I agree. We all agree that going into Afghanistan on a mission of Nation Building [counter-insurgency] was fool hearty and that now the only mission capable of credible pursuit is counter-terrorism. It's long since past time to withdraw. Obama has sufficient courage [guts] to order the counter-terrorism strike force in on May 1st but now needs to muster sufficient courage to order Petraus's counter-insurgency troops out. Mark my words. When withdrawals commence late this summer McCain will begin hooping and hollering. Ms. Brown, why don't you enlist for Afthanistan? Slabside, are you joking? Staying in Afghanistan is good?
Slabside posted at 2:21 pm on Wed, Jun 1, 2011.
Please permit me to elaborate;
Bush invading Afghanistan = BAD
Obama continuing to occupy Afghanistan = GOOD but America is bad