Kathianne
10-16-2009, 10:42 PM
This pretty much sums up my thinking. Considering how the first foray pushed al Queda into Pakistan from Afghanistan, to think they can't 'melt back' is preposterous on the face of it:
http://www.esquire.com/the-side/war-room/biden-afghanistan-strategy-101609
Why Joe Biden's War Plan Spells the Rebirth of Al Qaeda
Because you can chase the pests out of Afghanistan and into Pakistan all you want, but unless Obama really wants to clean up the world's most decrepit apartment, the parasites are just going to come back. A call for continued nation-building.
By: Thomas P.M. Barnett
Now that we know the damn kid was sleeping in his attic, can we return to Topic A? As in Afghanistan (and, lest anyone in the administration forget, Pakistan), for which Vice President Biden has been getting a lot of attention: Arianna Huffington is calling for his head, Newsweek is hailing him as a soothsayer, and most of America is wondering when the hell President Obama's going to make up his mind on "his war."
As I detailed here last week, it's a dangerous path for Obama to tread somewhere between "all-in" (Stanley McChrystal's method of controversy, with more troops, more nation-building, and more counterinsurgency) and "strategic disengagement" (Biden's weapon of choice, with more drones, more nation-leaving, and a refocusing on counterterrorism). On the one hand, I can almost see why the president would side with his veep: By essentially shifting "the good war" from Afghanistan to Pakistan, Obama purportedly saves money, lives, and support from an increasingly frustrated electorate. And when you've got Pakistan looking like a Harrison Ford movie after a Saturday military siege, a Monday car bombing, a Thursday police assault, and this morning's suicide attack as just the latest in a string of violence there, it looks good for an American president to ditch a Vietnam-like "quagmire" in Afghanistan for Al Qaeda-hunting in Pakistan. In effect, we'd be taking a "good-enough" outcome on one front for the promise for the limited liabilities of another front where the people don't really want us and the army's already going after the bad guys anyway.
Trouble is, Biden's logic ignores our past successes in Iraq, the current state of globalization, the future of Afghanistan, and, perhaps reinforcing all three, the haunting presence of Al Qaeda. If Obama submits to Biden, as I suspect he will, is there any reason to think America won't simply preside over the rebirth of Al Qaeda? Probably not. Whether it's Bin Laden and Co. or some successor entity, whether it's doubling back to a faltering Afghanistan or reconstituting itself in Central Asia's restive Fergana Valley or somewhere in the Islamic upper-half of Africa, it'll be back...
http://www.esquire.com/the-side/war-room/biden-afghanistan-strategy-101609
Why Joe Biden's War Plan Spells the Rebirth of Al Qaeda
Because you can chase the pests out of Afghanistan and into Pakistan all you want, but unless Obama really wants to clean up the world's most decrepit apartment, the parasites are just going to come back. A call for continued nation-building.
By: Thomas P.M. Barnett
Now that we know the damn kid was sleeping in his attic, can we return to Topic A? As in Afghanistan (and, lest anyone in the administration forget, Pakistan), for which Vice President Biden has been getting a lot of attention: Arianna Huffington is calling for his head, Newsweek is hailing him as a soothsayer, and most of America is wondering when the hell President Obama's going to make up his mind on "his war."
As I detailed here last week, it's a dangerous path for Obama to tread somewhere between "all-in" (Stanley McChrystal's method of controversy, with more troops, more nation-building, and more counterinsurgency) and "strategic disengagement" (Biden's weapon of choice, with more drones, more nation-leaving, and a refocusing on counterterrorism). On the one hand, I can almost see why the president would side with his veep: By essentially shifting "the good war" from Afghanistan to Pakistan, Obama purportedly saves money, lives, and support from an increasingly frustrated electorate. And when you've got Pakistan looking like a Harrison Ford movie after a Saturday military siege, a Monday car bombing, a Thursday police assault, and this morning's suicide attack as just the latest in a string of violence there, it looks good for an American president to ditch a Vietnam-like "quagmire" in Afghanistan for Al Qaeda-hunting in Pakistan. In effect, we'd be taking a "good-enough" outcome on one front for the promise for the limited liabilities of another front where the people don't really want us and the army's already going after the bad guys anyway.
Trouble is, Biden's logic ignores our past successes in Iraq, the current state of globalization, the future of Afghanistan, and, perhaps reinforcing all three, the haunting presence of Al Qaeda. If Obama submits to Biden, as I suspect he will, is there any reason to think America won't simply preside over the rebirth of Al Qaeda? Probably not. Whether it's Bin Laden and Co. or some successor entity, whether it's doubling back to a faltering Afghanistan or reconstituting itself in Central Asia's restive Fergana Valley or somewhere in the Islamic upper-half of Africa, it'll be back...