I take issue with Mr. O’Malley’s letter in Wednesday’s edition. Primarily, I contest his statement that there is an undefined mission for the United States military in Afghanistan.
President Barack H. Obama stated the following in 2009: “Our over-arching goal remains the same; to disrupt, dismantle and defeat Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan; and to prevent its capacity to threaten America and our allies in the future.”
You may say, “That was then; this is now.” True, but the mission of our military is the same -- no matter that the focus of our leaders has been blurred.
Consider this: What is the goal of the Taliban and other insurrectionist groups? Is it not to threaten our peace and destroy the prosperity that we enjoy in this blessed land? Have terrorists succeeded? Have they advanced their cause?
Do you fear to walk the streets, lest you get caught in a firefight? Are you careful to drive in the tracks of the car in front, lest your tires strike an IED? Must you guard your speech to not offend anyone, lest you lose your tongue to some dissident authority?
Can you discern my political leanings by my statements? Do I fear to let you know them?
I am grateful that our military must travel to other lands to protect us! This is not just for our sake, but also for the sake of citizens in those other countries. Those peoples are enjoying the privileges of democracy for the first time in the history of their society.
Of course there is imperfection in the process, just as there was in the beginning of our nation. Societal change is never quick or easy or clean. It is a process that spans decades and generations.
The wonder is that our country survived its infancy and has grown to maturity. The blessing is that nearly from the beginning the United States of America has participated in (and sometimes instigated) nation-building, rather than colonialism. We have always given more than we took. Helping people to grow into self-government is an offering we can afford!
Patrick Shepherd
Mesa
Dale Whiting posted at 8:47 pm on Sun, Sep 2, 2012.
Abstract101,
Let's see. We earned the reputation of being Ugly Americans in South America, allowing our big businesses to take over for local-domestic run operations. Is that not subjugation? We had our way in Iran in 1953 in overthrowing an elected government, then seeing that it was replaced by the Shaw. If not subjugation, what is that? Wishing to win the cold war, we took over from the French in Vietnam and removed several of our own disappointing puppet governments. Subjugation? Nationbuilding? Which ever these were, they were and are wrong, wrong headed, and morally wrong. I doubt our founding fathers would own up to us. What do you think Thomas Jefferson would say about this behavior?
Abstract01 posted at 12:36 pm on Sat, Sep 1, 2012.
E.V. Perhaps the letter writer has more to do every day than engage in sword/pen conflicts on the Web.
BTW, if you are complaining about the vagueness of the mission statement, blame the person who made the statement, don't shoot the messenger!
I would ask again, do you fear for your life and well-being, while living in this country?
And can you deny that during your lifetime the United States has (although not always successfully) engaged in nation-building, rather than subjugating other societies?
Is that a bad thing?
Dale Whiting posted at 8:53 am on Sat, Sep 1, 2012.
Sock,
Not only can we not win a protracted war in Asia, we have no business fighting wars anywhere. What did Afghanitan do against us? It is a small and loosely organized, poorly controlled, decentralized country. War lords rule. Tribalism is the name of the political game. And where bin Laden knew how to play that game to get himself a sanctuary, we come in and seek to rebuild the entire nation. We have no business doing so. We took bin Laden out. That was the only justifiable goal.
We agree. Now is the time to get out. We profoundly disagree as to why.
Engaged Voter posted at 4:43 pm on Fri, Aug 31, 2012.
Still waiting for the letter writer to define the "Afghanistan mission".
If you're going to claim something is "well defined", at least have the backbone to support said claim.
sockratties posted at 6:01 am on Wed, Aug 29, 2012.
Dale
We must avoid a protracted ground war in Asia. A mission, maybe, but not a war. We can’t change hearts and minds, only behaviours. My reason for wanting us out of Afghanistan has nothing to do with Islam although you really got hung up on that. We can’t win a land war in Afghanistan and history supports that fact.
I mentioned the blog because of the 70 page army report it cited. I don’t know if you have a reading comprehension problem or just a comprehension problem. Maybe it’s that missionary virus you contracted in Utah (just kidding) but we are talking about a clash of cultures here. Forcing our young soldiers to endure the social inconsistancies they face everyday destroys them. How much amusement do you get out of cutting off the paws of a puppy and watching it try to walk? How do you erase the memory of young boys being raised as girl dancers (bacha-bazi) and sodimized and raped? Can you tolorate facial disfigurement of a wife or daughter for disobeying you?
Read the report, it’s not an opinion piece.
A Crisis of Trust and Cultural Incompatibilty: A Red Team Study of Mutual Perceptions of Afghan National Security Force Personnel and U.S. Soldiers in Understanding and Mitigating the Phenomena of ANSF-Committed Fratricide-Murders May 12, 2011. (Jeffrey Bordin, Ph.D. N2KL Red Team Political and Military Behavioral Scientist jeffrey.bordin@afghan.swa.army.mil)
I don’t know how you can refute the report. You can agree or disagree with Dr. Bordin’s conclusion but the content of the report is there, appears valid and in my opinion, should be considered.
Dale Whiting posted at 1:38 pm on Tue, Aug 28, 2012.
Sockratties,
Yes, I did read the article you mentioned. Hopefully before you first read it, you gleaned from the contacts you already have had in Islam the notion that it is not Islam that motivates the "hate" you cite, put the occupation itself. This hate of occupation is not unlike the hate brewed in Northern Ireland by the Catholic Irish majority for the occupation and subjugation they suffer at the hands of the Protestant Irish minority, helped by the presence of British troops from the big island. Thatcher was able to settle these disputes. But they are heating back up again!
However it was not clear to me that your article made this clear distinction. It sounded like more of the ever prevalent Islamophopia to me. Care to correct my opinion about the article? Or do you blame Islam, too?
Regardless, we appear to agree. Patrick is off his rocker in saying that the mission is well defined!
sockratties posted at 10:41 pm on Mon, Aug 27, 2012.
Dale…
You make a lot of assumptions, most of which are wrong. I do interface with people of many ilk, some Islamic, on a weekly basis. What you would call half-cocked I would call informed. Take off your rose colored glasses and blinders.
I don’t know if you read the article I mentioned but those people have little resemblance to Islamic people I work and study with. Evidently you have pre-conceived notions about the Afghan situation. My information is from continual interface with people who have been and served there, who are still involved there and who remain up to date on the real, not fabricated by the government, conditions our soldiers face every day.
We don’t have any Afghanistan allies there and whoever tells you we do is blowing smoke you know where. They hate our occupation and they are learning to hate us.
Dale Whiting posted at 8:32 pm on Mon, Aug 27, 2012.
Nice thought, sock.
One probably can make a lot of things from a hay truck. But an Indy car is not one of them. Yet before you go off half cocked about Islam, try getting to know a few Muslims personally yourself and don't let those "ihinker" web sites to all of your thinking for you.
sockratties posted at 7:54 pm on Mon, Aug 27, 2012.
Before you think about the mission of sending little girls to school and installing a stable democratic government in Afghanistan you might compare the mission Americans envision with the analogy of building an Indy race car out of a hay truck. Is the mission possible?
Take a look at the report on American Thinker web site, link below. I’m not trying to persuade anyone about anything…. just believe we need a more comprehensive view before we sacrifice even one more life to the “cause.”
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/08/army_report_buried_islamic_motivations_for_afghan_murders_of_us_troops.html#.UDv-_iAGf-Y.email
Dale Whiting posted at 1:14 pm on Mon, Aug 27, 2012.
Ditto, Engaged Voter!
This week the RNC will nominate Mitt Romney as it's presidential candidate for 2012. I remember when Mitt's father, George Romney, was running in 1968. I'd have voted for George. He was honest. Upon returning from a tour in Vietnam, as a candidate George was castigated for telling us the truth. He'd [and by inferrence we'd all] been brainwashed about that war. In 2002, we were all brain washed again. This time, not by a Democratic president [LBJ] but by a Republican president [Bush43].
Patrick, you've been brainwashed. You just don't realize it yet!
Engaged Voter posted at 8:31 am on Mon, Aug 27, 2012.
Dear Mr. Sheperd.
If the mission is well defined, why the blurry, vague description of it in your letter?
"What is the goal of the Taliban and other insurrectionist groups?"
To take back control of their country. And based on the latest reports, they are winning.
Here's a fun fact for you - it wasn't the Taliban that flew planes into the World Trade Center, it was Saudi Arabian nationals.
If we have a "well defined mission" in Afghanistan, I sure would like to hear it...all this evasion is tiresome.
Dale Whiting posted at 7:52 pm on Sun, Aug 26, 2012.
Patrick,
It is one thing to have a somewhat vague mission statement, one you judge as being "well defined" and another to have a mission statement which is able to be translated into day to day feasible workable operations. Why don't you go back and re-read that article reporting on General Stan McChrystal. Stan did not find the mission to be well defined. I'll side with Stan! He knows what he is talking about!