Befuddled in Afghanistan
Juan Cole, in his always dead-on weblog mainly focused on the Middle East, "Informed Comment," has a post today that says that President Obama is losing in Afghanistan, highlighted by his failed attempts to get rid of the Afghan President, Hamid Karzai, whose policies have always seemed to do very little or nothing good for that country that is so severely cursed (my words), and so Obama has now been forced to swing his boat partway around, midriver in the rapids, and support Karzai instead.
Actually there is and always has been only one good thing to do in Afghanistan -- if you are unlucky or idiotic enough to be there -- and that is to kiss the poppies goodbye and get out, posthaste. And the smart thing is never to bring any troops in there in the first place. There is nothing for anyone to gain in that crack of the world except endless stretches of rock. Afghanistan was already forsaken centuries ago by the only two forces that really count in the long run -- geography and climate -- and this barrenness is reflected in the people who insist on holding their services there regardless. There is simply no way for any sort of a win to be had in that place, even by the native-born. It's all lose-lose.
Obama keeps speaking of doing something about Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, but Cole, who has been keeping a keen eye on that region for years, since Napoleon's time it seems, assures us that that terrorist force is not a factor there.
If B. Obama doesn't watch out and get a better grip on things, I think he will be in mortal danger of having a dark cloud slowly spreading over his presidency that will at length become noticeable to even his strongest supporters and that no one at Harvard University will be able to help him dissipate. His Afghanistan notions and other positions that he has taken increasingly suggest that he actually didn't spend much time on the American mainland until about 2001, because he appears to be still stuck headfirst in the frame of reference that prevailed in this country during that dark and benighted year.
Actually there is and always has been only one good thing to do in Afghanistan -- if you are unlucky or idiotic enough to be there -- and that is to kiss the poppies goodbye and get out, posthaste. And the smart thing is never to bring any troops in there in the first place. There is nothing for anyone to gain in that crack of the world except endless stretches of rock. Afghanistan was already forsaken centuries ago by the only two forces that really count in the long run -- geography and climate -- and this barrenness is reflected in the people who insist on holding their services there regardless. There is simply no way for any sort of a win to be had in that place, even by the native-born. It's all lose-lose.
Obama keeps speaking of doing something about Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, but Cole, who has been keeping a keen eye on that region for years, since Napoleon's time it seems, assures us that that terrorist force is not a factor there.
If B. Obama doesn't watch out and get a better grip on things, I think he will be in mortal danger of having a dark cloud slowly spreading over his presidency that will at length become noticeable to even his strongest supporters and that no one at Harvard University will be able to help him dissipate. His Afghanistan notions and other positions that he has taken increasingly suggest that he actually didn't spend much time on the American mainland until about 2001, because he appears to be still stuck headfirst in the frame of reference that prevailed in this country during that dark and benighted year.
posted by Carl (aka Sofarsogoo) | 10:23 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home