another ass backwards analysis of Afbackwardstan
by
doodahman
10/29/2009, 2:06 PM #
Wow. Slate analysts have an uncanny knack for missing the point no matter how large and looming it is.
So, leave it to the Fray. Here's a clue, Dickerson--
A. nobody gives a fucking rat's ass about corruption in Afghanistan. In fact, if their leadership were not corrupt, we could not buy them and thus we could not exert any control over them. A corrupt leadership is the sine qua non of maintaining hegemony in a Muslim backwater thousands of miles from our shores. FUCKING DUH, you dumbass.
B. what does matter is our ability to accomplish the limited but necessary hegemonic goals. They are: 1) protecting petroleum pipelines from the Caspian Sea to Turkey; 2) denying safe havens to terrorists or insurgents that would otherwise use Afghanistan to launch attacks against the US or its overseas assets; 3) allowing the US to maintain force forward facilities on the Pakistani and Iranian borders to allow efficient force projection in those regions.
Those goals do not require pacification of the entire country or even large parts of it. What they do require is that we obtain good intelligence from indigenous sources, a free hand for our own intelligence services to collect information; a free hand to use military force inside the country or across its borders against its neighbors. Other than that, they can set their women on fire and sodomize all the pre-teen boys they want to for all we care. It's not our problem.
Since those requirements can largely be met by maintaining a rump govt in Kabul and good relations with local warlords (be they Northern Alliance monsters or Taliban monsters), there is no need for massive garrisoning of every region, or for backing up the central govt militarily every time it wants to punish a miscreant client warlord or take away some irrelevant region from Taliban control. We know where we need to have control and as long as the gov't there gives us a free hand to operate in those areas, the rest of Afghanistan can go to hell.
Now, of course the foregoing is an entirely immoral, anti-American position which will ultimately result in the destruction of the Republic (if it isn't already effectively destroyed). But that's for another debate. There are simply no conditions under which the US will be able to leave Afghanistan-- what we are striving for are conditions under which the US will be able to stay in Afghanistan indefinitely.
That Slate contributors either don't or won't understand this simply, undeniable fact is simply indicative of what happens when the function is not truth to enlighten but propaganda to confuse and demoralize.
Fucking lap monkey pieces of shit.