General Boot, assessing the situation thousands of miles away in his Washington, D.C. luxury apartment.
Here’s the deal: the U.S. didn’t intervene Afghanistan to bolster human rights, women’s rights, democratic rights, or any rights. It intervened to clobber UBL’s Al-Qaeda.
Here’s the deal: the U.S. didn’t intervene Afghanistan to bolster human rights, women’s rights, democratic rights, or any rights. It intervened to clobber UBL’s Al-Qaeda.
That job was accomplished in the first few months. By the winter of 2002, the Taliban were hunkered down; Al-Qaeda’s infrastructure was eradicated; its fighters were cold, bleeding, and wondering where their sheikh was; and the Taliban were begging to negotiate.
Instead of calling a win a win, we stupidly decided to change the mission completely into building a democracy, a national army, a functioning government, and a sustainable Afghan economy. Terrorist hunting became nation-building, which eventually turned into strategic myopia.
Those who argue that a U.S. troop pullout from Afghanistan would automatically lead to an AQ takeover are playing games. They neglect to account for the fact that perhaps the Taliban have learned a lesson over these last 19 years: don’t get too close to an FTO.
They also fail to mention that Afghanistan’s neighbors have even more of an interest than the United States in ensuring terrorists are tracked, targeted, and bottled up. Neither Russia, Iran, Pakistan or the Central Asian states want a jihadist wonderland in Afghanistan.
Supporters of stay-the-course can’t envision any scenario where U.S. troops withdraw. They constantly talk about the risk of an American departure. But what about the risk of not leaving? May I remind Max Boot that two U.S. servicemembers were killed just last week.
