|
Not in the slightest. Wars can be fought over territories or resources, and what may be an ideological struggle to one faction could well be a simple fight for survival for their opponents.
I'm not going to say the coalition had no business in Afghanistan. We all went in there, because it was necessary. But there's a fine line here, and it needs to be tread with caution. As soon as you start trying to fight against a concept, you've lost by default. You can't beat an idea through brute force.
Removing the Taliban from power wasn't a bad thing. Driving the Al Qaeda forces out of Afghanistan certainly wasn't a bad thing. But those goals have been accomplished. The next step is to rebuild and restabilize the country, and those things can't be done under constant conflict. If you're trying to wipe out 'terrorism' or 'insurgency' or even 'extremists' through military might, you're never going to win. There's no solid force, there's no infrastructure to speak of. Your enemy is the ultimate in adaptable, ad hoc forces.
It is my opinion that negotiating with the moderate elements of the Afghan political structure is not only the best course of action, it's the only one that stands any chance of bringing peace to the region again.
__________________
I wake up in the morning more tired than before I slept
I get through cryin' and I'm sadder than before I wept
I get through thinkin' now, and the thoughts have left my head
I get through speakin' and I can't remember, not a word that I said
- Ben Harper, Show Me A Little Shame
|