Will Afghanistan turn into Obama's Vietnam? - Japan Times

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

Are we start hearing about "fortified villages" and "the light at the end of the tunnel" while fighting another lost war?

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/eo20090204gd.html

You aren't really the U.S. president until you've ordered an airstrike on somebody, so Barack Obama is certainly president now: two in his first week in office. But now that he has been bloodied, can we talk a little about this expanded war he's planning to fight in Afghanistan?

It's not a question of whether the intelligence on which the attacks were based was accurate. The question is: Do these killings actually serve any useful purpose? And the same question applies to the entire U.S. war in Afghanistan.

Obama may be planning to shut Guantanamo, but the broader concept of a "war on terror" is still alive and well in Washington. Most of the people he has appointed to run his defense and foreign policies believe in it, and there is no sign that he himself questions it. Yet even 15 years ago the notion would have been treated with contempt in every military staff college in the country.

That generation of American officers learned two things from their miserable experience in Vietnam. One was that going halfway around the world to fight a conventional military campaign against an ideology (communism then, Islamism now) was a truly stupid idea. The other was that no matter how strenuously the other side insists that it is motivated by a world-spanning ideology, its real motives are mostly political and quite local (Vietnamese nationalism then, Iraqi and Afghan nationalism now).

[Kolesar]

1. "The War on Terror" is not about Iraqi nationalism

that third paragraph is a real stretch, too

[anonymous171]

2. Iraqi "nationalism" ? lol

I agree with the other parts of the article though.

[Mari333]

3. if we stay there, yes, it will. nt

[thereismore]

4. 2nd that. nt