Thoughts & Commentary on the Obama Administration

[Lemur]

Most of them are just retreads of the arguments against Iraq.

And as we learned in Iraq, if we massively increase troop strength and spread the bribes liberally amongst the tribes, we can buy a temporary lull in violence.

Not sure that's such a great lesson.

There's no doubt that we can re-make Afghanistan into something resembling a nation-state if we invest heavily in men and money for the next ten to twenty years. Is this something we ought to do? Are there alternative strategies?

[Crazed Rabbit]

And as we learned in Iraq, if we massively increase troop strength and spread the bribes liberally amongst the tribes, we can buy a temporary lull in violence.

Not sure that's such a great lesson.

There's no doubt that we can re-make Afghanistan into something resembling a nation-state if we invest heavily in men and money for the next ten to twenty years. Is this something we ought to do? Are there alternative strategies?

Are you saying you think Iraq is going to go back to civil-war level violence?

CR

[Lemur]

Are you saying you think Iraq is going to go back to civil-war level violence?

No, 'cause a great deal of the ethnic cleansing has already taken place, so a return to full-on civil war is unlikely while we are there. But who gets to control what has not been settled, and there are a whole lot of armed people who think their tribe/group should take over. Things should get very hot as soon as we are perceived to be minimized.

The surge/bribe was a great solution to a self-inflicted mess, but the underlying disorder is still there. We established security, fantastic. But until there's a political solution the whole thing can unravel. And that is entirely up to the Iraqis.

If anything, the political situation in Afghanistan is more troubling. Leaving aside the improbability of defeating an enemy who can fall back to a secure base (Pakistan), let's ask the big questions:

• What level of political stability would be sufficient for our counterinsurgency goals?
• If the Karzai government is too corrupt and ineffective, is there a replacement group in Afghanistan or not?
• If not, what can we do about it?
• How long might it take to achieve minimal political stability?
• How long are we prepared to be there, and at what cost?
• What will success look like? (Please be realistic, and don't say "A functioning representative democracy," 'cause that is not happening in the next decade.)

-edit-

P.S.: Since I answered your question, CR, could you do me the courtesy of answering mine?

[Crazed Rabbit]

P.S.: Since I answered your question, CR, could you do me the courtesy of answering mine?

Yes, I could.

A little data for the much-dismissed racial angle:

A very little data. I'd like to see the questions they used to determine 'racial resentment' - is being against affirmative action being racially resentful? - and what fraction of their population was 'above average resentful'. And what fraction of the people who didn't want Obama's reform were also 'resentful'.

And back to Lemur's questions about Afghanistan.

I don't see your choices as the only possibilities - ie that we have to choose between a decade plus of occupation or pulling out. Or that Pakistan is completely secure for the Taliban. I think we should strive to make a functioning, stable, non-Islamist government. If we don't everything we've worked for is wasted. And the Taliban will return to power and continuing supporting al queda. Plus they'll be able to destabilize Pakistan easier. And so, likely, we'll have to go in there again.

I don't think it will take a dozen years of 100,000 troops or other 'the empire must expand or it will collapse' silliness from Sullivan.

As for Iraq - so far the 'lull' has been permanent, and paved the way for a political solution.

CR

[Tribesman]

As for Iraq - so far the 'lull' has been permanent, and paved the way for a political solution.

If the lull is permanent then how are attacks increasing again month after month?