Senator Fritz Hollings: Why are we in Afghanistan?

[Wetzelbill]

Why are we in Afghanistan?

I keep asking the question: "Why are we in Afghanistan?" No one has a good answer. A few without television respond, "To get Osama." But everyone agrees that he is somewhere in Pakistan. Then the answer is: "As President George W. Bush said, 'to spread democracy.'" The Brits tried to spread democracy for years. The Russians tried to spread communism for years. But democracy must come from within. I helped liberate Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, sixty-eight years ago and they have yet to opt for democracy. We liberated Kuwait eighteen years ago and they have yet to opt for democracy. In the Muslim world more important than freedom and democracy is tribe and religion. We have made the good college try for over seven years and now should realize that we are not going to teach warlords to like democracy and grow cotton instead of poppies.

Now some answer to prevent Afghanistan from becoming a safe haven for Al Qaida. I called the State Department after 9/11, and it reported Al Qaida in forty-five countries, including the United States, but not Iraq. Now we have spread Al Qaida to Iraq and determined to have Al Qaida grow in Afghanistan. What we can't understand is that we are creating terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Taliban were our best friends in Charlie Wilson's War -- the only war we've won since World War II. I helped Charlie on the Senate side. I didn't know what was going on, but he was getting Israel to send Stinger missiles to Muslim Pakistan to shoot down the Russians. Now we are determined to turn our former friends into enemies and destroy Pakistan. Yesterday I read an article that it won't be long before charging President George W. Bush with war crimes for killing civilians in Pakistan with drones. Now the same charge could be made against President Obama. Five years ago, I was in Pakistan to learn that Osama bin Laden had a sixty percent approval rating and President Bush was at ten percent. I wouldn't advise an America to walk the streets of any city in Pakistan today. We are ruining Pakistan. Finally, I'm given the answer, "to stabilize Afghanistan." The best way to stabilize is to get out. It became a matter of conscience for me years ago. I always remember the Wartime Prayer found in Eleanor Roosevelt's papers:

"Dear Lord, lest I continue my complacent way, help me to remember that somewhere, somehow out there, a man died for me today. As long as there be war, I then must ask and answer, Am I worth dying for?"

Why are we killing GIs to spread terrorism?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sen-ernest-frederick-hollings/why-are-we-in-afghanistan_b_167910.html

[mike_c]

1. WOW! K&R! What an excellent essay!

We need to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan immediately. I'm tired of hearing all the rationalizations about staying, including the Pottery Barn rule, which is just about the lamest of lame justifications: "we broke it so we have to keep on smashing it until it's fixed." :puke:

[Hubert Flottz]

2. To guard the Oil and Natural Gas pipelines that transport...

those products from the Caspian basin oil and gas deposits to the north of Afghanistan.

[Sinistrous]

7. I just could not let your statement of this core truth pass without

adding my complete agreement. We went into Iraq to steal its oil; we went into Afghanistan to secure the route for that damn pipeline.

[Wetzelbill]

11. Probably to suppress it all more than to steal it

and have a secure route. At least Iraq's oil anyway. Part of the problem there was Saddam kept going over his quota, the Saudis and Western oil interests never liked that. Some of the neocons wanted to flood the world market with Iraqi oil to nullify Saudi control of OPEC, but the Bush and GOP corporatists wanted no part of that because it hurt Big Oil's bottom line. The lower production the higher the cost of a barrel and the more cash petro-dictators and our boys in Houston make. The low production from the Iraq war made our oil guys even richer, they love that. Either way it's all about controlling it, they decided when to turn the spigots on and off, just whenever it suits them best.

[FiveGoodMen]

19. That's exactly what I think, too.

[Fireweed247]

20. we all know this!

why doesn't Obama? :grr:

[SpiralHawk]

3. The k and the r

Thank you, Fritz, for your explanation.

And thank you, Hubert, for reminding us of the oil & gas crony reason -- the ugly true reason.

[Are_grits_groceries]

4. Oh how I wish Fritz was still representing me!!! nt

[SCantiGOP]

15. I voted for him

every time he ran. Doubt I'll ever get to vote for a Democrat to win a Senate seat again.
My favorite Fritz story: He was running against Henry McMaster for re-election (McMaster is AG and will be running for Governor in 2 years). Some idiot GOP Senator made a comment on a news show that he had seen Senators doing drugs on the Senate floor. The Democrats controlled Congress, so the head of the Ethics Committee said he was going to subpoena the guy, put him under oath and demand that he name names, so he had to look like a fool and say he didn't ACTUALLY see anyone but he suspected it had happened. Looking for some way to bolster his clearly failing campaign, McMaster publicly challenged Hollings to take a drug test and make the results public. Hollings was caught cold by a reporter who asked him if he had heard it and what his response would be. Without any hesitation, he replied, "I will gladly take a drug test and make the results public if my opponent will agree to take an IQ test and publish those results."

[Are_grits_groceries]

27. I love the way he went after FEMA

after Hugo hit. Called them damn jackasses.

[raccoon]

25. Me too. Now we've got Lindsey Graham and Dement-ed. nt

[Xithras]

5. What we need now is a diplomatic solution, not a military one.

Like it or not, the Taliban are a domestic political force in Afghanistan, and they came to power specifically because they promised peace and the war-weary Afghani's were tired of living in a battlefield. The Taliban have expressed an interest in talking out a peace settlement if it's linked to us leaving. Karzai has expressed an interest in negotiating an end to the fighting. Hell, PETRAEUS has said that peace talks would be a good idea. It seems like all sides are interested in talking, and yet we're talking about fortifying our military presence. Why?

[Wetzelbill]

6. some of it made more sense during the campaign

The situation has evolved enough now where it looks like everyone is so war weary they want to come to the table. We had lost ground militarily, but now, I am not so sure that we can't gain some of that back at the negotiating table as opposed to enhancing the war effort. It's a tricky situation, but it looks like viable peace talks could come about.

[watrwefitinfor]

24. That is exactly what Richard Holbrooke said last night

on the PBS News Hour. Holbrooke replied to one of the interviewer's baiting questions, that the Obama administration understands that there is no military solution to the Afghanistan-Pakistan question.

JUDY WOODRUFF: So you're saying it's too early at this point for the Obama administration to define how it sees victory in Afghanistan?

RICHARD HOLBROOKE: Well, first of all, the victory, as defined in purely military terms, is not achievable, and I cannot stress that too highly. What we're looking for is the definition of our vital national security interests, which included the point you made earlier about al-Qaida.

But denial of the Afghan territory to al-Qaida is not, in my view, anything beyond an interim necessity. After all, al-Qaida is operating freely in the tribal areas of western Pakistan.

What you see here -- and my trip and these two very important delegations that are coming to Washington next week -- and which I will say once more I'm discussing publicly here for the first time tonight -- are a manifestation of a new, intense, engaged diplomacy designed to put Afghanistan and Pakistan into a larger regional context and move forward to engage other countries in the effort to stabilize this incredibly volatile region.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/asia/jan-june09/holbrooke_02-18.html

Spoken like someone who clearly remembers (and whose boss is aware of) the Vietnam and Iraq examples. (I hope.)

If the interviewer had been more interested in honestly examining Obama's position now than in trying to play a subtle game of "gotcha" with Holbrooke, he would have probably explained a lot more about the policy. He implied several times that was his purpose for the interview.

It was an excellent interview in many ways, and very informative as to what he had been doing in that area, who he had met with; what they had discussed. He beautifully defended Obama and the administration against her implied slurs. He refused to be baited by any of her questions. He had clear, concise, focused and intelligent replies, that shut her right down. And he clearly laid out the goal, as shown in the above quote from the interview.

If you have broadband and can find it online it would be well worth everyone's time to view it.

Wat

[Freddie Stubbs]

8. To stop the country from being taken over by those who have a history of harboring terrorists

[Wetzelbill]

9. well that doesn't really exist there

In some form, they all have supported those groups. Even Panjshir Tajiks have had alliances with them before.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

12. The terrorists that the U.S. supported as long as they were

ambushing the Soviets

[NNN0LHI]

13. You want the military to start blowing up the Tim McVeigh types in your neighborhood with missiles?

[Hell Hath No Fury]

17. And how long should we be prepared to stay there?

We've been there 7 years to accomplish that particular "goal" -- should we stay another seven? Maybe another 15 years? Indefinitely?

[NNN0LHI]

10. Yep, its time to pull out the soldiers and send in the lawyers

I knew this was a mistake before we went in.

I hate being right sometimes.

Don

[bvar22]

14. President Obama & The Democrats are precariously close....

...to OWNING the War Crimes in Afghanistan/Pakistan.
They have a very narrow window of opportunity to turn this around.

I read that yesterday Obama signed the order to Escalate the WAR in the Middle East.

There is NO Military Objective in Afghanistan (or Iraq).
There is NO Exit Strategy In Afghanistan (or Iraq).

The USA has NO business maintaining a Military presence in either place.


Bring our boys (and girls) home NOW!.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

16. Because we have to stop the dominoes falling...oh, wait...wrong war but the same strategy.

With, predictably, the same results.

[Wetzelbill]

18. what you just said

depressed the hell out of me.

[Fireweed247]

21. kick

:kick:

[PurityOfEssence]

22. To prove that Democrats are manly, too...

This is sheer folly; it will be seen as a religious war.

[Poiuyt]

26. Unfortunately, there's a lot of truth in your statement

[seemslikeadream]

23. Hey that's what I want to know