They Live There

The main problem with the Afghanistan War is that it can't be won.

We are going to lose in Afghanistan -- for certain. The reason why is simple, and repeated once again, for the benefit of slow learners, in Bob Herbert's NY Times column this morning:

The thought of escalating our involvement in Afghanistan reminded me of an exchange that David Halberstam described in “The Best and the Brightest.” It occurred as plans were being developed for the expansion of U.S. involvement in Vietnam. McGeorge Bundy, who served as national security adviser to Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, showed some of the elaborate and sophisticated plans to one of his aides. The aide was impressed, but also concerned.

“The thing that bothers me,” he told Bundy, “is that no matter what we do to them, they live there and we don’t, and they know that someday we’ll go away and thus they know they can outlast us.”

Bundy replied, “That’s a good point.”

It's more than a good point, of course; it's reality. They live there and we don't. Add to that the fact that, as in Vietnam, we're backing a regime that's worse than a dirt sandwich (that must really help our credibility in that part of the world), and the picture begins to come into focus.

But reality never gets in the way of an empire infatuated with fantasies of its own greatness, invincibility, and glorious purpose.

Afghanistan isn't even a separate war. It's part of the Pentagon's endless, perpetual war for no particular reason which started with Vietnam and has continued intermittently since then. It has two main purposes: 1) it gives the military establishment something to do, and 2) war propaganda televised by the establishment networks helps keep the citizenry passive and stupid, and prevents us from focusing on the real problems of a dying empire.

So how's that "Hope and Change" working out for you guys?