07 Jun

Ending the Longest War and Liberals ready to strike out at White House


Ending the Longest War

This past week, the United States recognized a dubious milestone in our country’s history as direct war spending for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan topped $1 trillion. Unfortunately, we have reached a second milestone, with the War in Afghanistan passing the Vietnam War to officially become the longest military conflict in American history.

Most historians agree that the Vietnam War began with the enactment of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, ended with the withdrawal of the last American troops in March of 1973, and lasted a total of 103 months. The War in Afghanistan began on October 7, 2001 when President George W. Bush ordered air strikes against militant camps. As of today, June 7, 2010, the war has just ended its 104th month.

For many, the Vietnam War conjures up images of war fatigue, when a larger ideological and strategic rationale for going to war devolved into a sense that our country was trapped in a military quagmire that lacked a clear purpose, identifiable goals, and deliverable objectives. After nearly nine years of war, many Americans are beginning to have many of the same impressions about our military operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

We should remember that the United States originally attacked Afghanistan to disrupt the Al Qaeda terrorist network. In an interview with CNN last October, National Security Advisor, General James Jones, acknowledged that “fewer than a hundred” Al Qaeda militants remain in Afghanistan. And yet, the war continues.

Like Vietnam, America’s political leadership struggles to justify the lives and treasure sacrificed in Afghanistan. Clear objectives have been replaced with murky concept-slogans, like “securing the population” or implementing “government in a box” in previously lawless areas, which seem to have only a tangential connection to allowing our troops to complete their mission and come home. For example, as we prepare for a new offensive in Kandahar, the failure of the Afghan police to impose order following the recent operations in Marja should cause Americans to question whether the current troop surge is helping to bring the war to a close.

In an interview with C-SPAN taped before his death last year, former Secretary of Defense McNamara noted that one of the Vietnam War’s fatal flaws was the failure to recognize the existence of a civil war:

“We were fighting — and we didn’t realize it — a civil war. Now, true, obviously there were Soviet and Chinese influence and support and no question that the communists were trying to control South Vietnam, but it was basically a civil war. And one of the things we should learn is you can’t fight and win a civil war with outside troops, and particularly not when the political structure in a country is dissolved. So it wasn’t the press that was the problem. The problem was that we were in the wrong place with the wrong tactics.”

McNamara’s words should haunt us today, as we recognize this new standard for military occupation. No amount of firepower will convince the Afghans to decide how to coexist with each other. Political conflicts do not have military solutions.

The Vietnam War took 58,000 American lives, weakened America’s image abroad for many years afterward, and sapped the ability of multiple presidents to pursue a robust domestic agenda at home. The War in Afghanistan is having a similar effect on our country.

Despite his many flaws, Richard Nixon recognized that there was a tipping point when our military presence in Vietnam could no longer be sustained. I believe we are close to a such a tipping point today. Many Members of Congress and citizen-activists are calling for withdrawal. I hope that you will join us. Securing a sustainable future for Afghans and Americans starts with bringing the troops home now.

Rep. John Conyers, Jr. is the chair of the Out of Afghanistan Caucus.


Liberals ready to strike out at White House over Afghanistan surge

By Jared Allen ,

 Liberals in Congress, already angry about healthcare reform, are sharpening their swords for a fight with the administration over Afghanistan.

They have opened one front with the White House on a public option for healthcare but are ready to open a second front on Afghanistan, even if it damages a president whose success is dependent on a strong record of accomplishment.

According to one House Democrat, the calls to end U.S. military intervention in Afghanistan are growing louder and coming from a larger and more diverse crowd.

On the heels of the deadliest month to date for U.S. troops in Afghanistan, liberals are bracing for a report from the top military commanders that could suggest more resources and troops are needed.

And they are increasingly worried that President Barack Obama will find it necessary to ask Congress for just that.

If that’s the case, liberals such as Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.), one of the three leaders of the Out of Iraq Caucus – which is slowly morphing into the Out of Afghanistan Caucus – said that progressives were prepared to stand in the way of any additional funding in an attempt to force the president’s hand.

“Just because President Obama is our president doesn’t mean we don’t feel the same outrage we felt regarding Iraq in this same time in the Iraq occupation,” Woolsey said. “Our president doesn’t get a pass on this.”

Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), who voted against the last Afghanistan supplemental spending bill requested by Obama, said he’s been hearing not just from liberal Democrats but from conservative Republicans as well, who he said are deeply concerned about the direction of the U.S. campaign to root out al-Qaeda.

“Since that vote, I’ve had a lot of members, Democrats and Republicans, come up to me and say, ‘Jeez, I wish I voted with you on that,’” McGovern said.

McGovern toured Afghanistan over the August recess and praised the efforts of the military and the State Department but he questioned whether those efforts were destined to fall short.

“I had the sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach that we’re getting sucked into an endless war,” McGovern said of his recent trip. “I don’t want to send more troops and countless billions of dollars down a rat hole if it’s not going to produce something in the end.”

On Thursday, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, held a press conference ahead of the release of the Afghanistan assessment report from Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan. They told reporters that U.S. forces must work to “turn around” the security situation in Afghanistan in the “limited” time frame of 12 to 18 months.

Neither indicated whether McChrystal would be asking for additional troops, but Gates left open the possibility that more troops would be needed. And he flatly rejected calls to pull troops out.

“I absolutely do not think it is time to get out of Afghanistan,” he said.

Liberal Democrats have already spent a month battling against the possibility that the public option will be stripped from the healthcare bill, and have vowed to derail Obama’s highest priority if that happens.

A host of liberal caucuses within the House are bracing for the possibility that on Wednesday night, during an address to a joint session of Congress, Obama will proclaim that a public option is not a necessary part of a final healthcare bill.

Now many of those same liberal members are gearing up to confront the president over Afghanistan if that’s necessary, as well.

“A lot of us didn’t vote for the last supplemental,” Woolsey said. “But we hadn’t organized, and we will be doing that.”

Prior to that vote, Obama personally called a number of skeptical Democrats to ask for their support, and he got it from enough of them to guarantee the bill’s passage.

McGovern suggested that any request for additional troops or resources will play out much differently this time, given the growing uncertainty among both Democrats and Republicans.

“One of the things we’ve never had on Afghanistan is a full debate,” McGovern said. “And I think there needs to be a full debate, a full discussion. We all need to know what we’re doing and what to expect.”

— Roxana Tiron contributed to this article

Comments are closed.

© 2021 | Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS)

Global Positioning System Gazettewordpress logo