AFGHANISTAN: Eight Questions - 0 Answers!

Anyone capable of writing explicitly, of examining topics with consequential impact on huge numbers of human beings, of having access to media as columnists or bloggers, or commentators on television or radio - they all turn to a single topic,regularly or occasionally, and that topic is Afghanistan. Despite the obvious concerns of Americans from all walks of life, private citizens to government policy makers, there seems to be no focus on solutions, hence the war drags on and the costs at all levels approach chaos - a pernicious curse on humanity - an endless tsunami of questions for which there are no answers. On that cheerful note of pending doom, ViewPoint attempts to narrow the issues and, perhaps, offer some clarity for those who seek the necessary answers before it is too late.

In no particular order, Question Number One, is so basic it must be stated ahead of any solutions. Why are we in Afghanistan?

Does anyone who thinks Afghanistan is the 'key' to ending terrorism appreciate that the problem is identical to the age-old attempt to capture mercury on a platter. Thus, Question Number Two becomes 'Are we in Afghanistan because we believe capturing or killing Osama BinLaden will end the existence of Al Queda?'

Question Number Three: Is the underlying policy of our government based on an assumption that terrorism is a manageable 'disease' - one which can be wiped out as surely as polio or malaria?

Since the dreadful day of attack on The United States on 9/11, there has been a 'mantra' of sorts which implies that we are in danger of further attacks and must eliminate the possibility, or at least, be prepared to thwart any domestic or foreign attacks in any shape or form - in other words, we live as though it could happen anywhere in the USA, or even touch off a firestorm of reaction by blowing up a single airplane. So, Question Number Four: Is there some thing as overwhelming as the European attempt to hold back the North Sea by building dikes, guiding the policy makers of this country?

Since we acknowledge that terrorism is a world wide menace to populations in virtually every nation on earth, is the United States leading or following attempts by other nations to protect their citizenry?  - making that Question Number Five.

Beyond the pointed questions above, there are many facts of historical importance that can and should create a hard and fast policy which would make terrorism in this country a challenge for any group, or individual, intent on doing harm. Once it becomes clear to those who would create havoc, be it a downed plane, a derailed train, a poisoned water source, an electronic wipe out of major consequence - that establishes a point of no return for the guilty. A policy becomes law. It is just as binding as the laws now in place that state the penalty for an attempt to overthrow the government. Question Number Six: would any written law reduce or eliminate terrorism in the USA?  And, yes, there are penalties on the books for terrorism - but we are talking about making the penalties as much a part of daily life here as the use of signs and other media similar to WWII use of displays for example that state "Loose lips sink ships!". No one will sit back and feel secure because of a coast to coast visual, audio  campaign to ward off potential terrorists, but isn't it better than doing nothing!

The essential question posed at the beginning of this ViewPoint remains critical. We try to deal with a government in Afghanistan that couldn't last one day in any town, city or state in this country. The newly elected president, Hamid Karzai, may have been elected through fraud. The drug trade of the country's largest poppy growers has been protected by the USA in order to prevent the tribal chiefs from opting out of the war against the Taliban. Vast sums of American money intended to create or bolster the population's willingness to rise above poverty and fecklessness has been misguided into the pockets of long time purveyors of corruption and fraud. Question Number Seven: Is the United State on a mission to catch a terrorist or are we 'nation building' at the expense of American blood and money? 

And, just as the first question must be answered, here is the final question of the day, Question Number Eight: Did President Obama make a mistake of significant proportions when, as an opening decision of his administration, he agreed to send an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan, instead of demanding the opposite - Afghanistan is a dismal failure for the United States - we're out of there ASAP?  A year later, we are fighting the Taliban ( for our benefit, or Afghanistan's?) - we are deep into a fiscal sink hole thanks in part to running two wars simultaneously, and to no avail if the purpose in Iraq and Afghanistan is to end terrorism. It is not to seek 'cop out' solutions for this issue of ViewPoint, but face it folks, countries like Israel and Ireland, have lived with terror for years, for a generation, and despite horrific explosions, deadly entrapments, and a constant threat of  terror, their populations and their governments have survived. We do not suggest that our future may be one of similar acceptance of terror as a fact of 21st century life on earth - but, like Global Warming, or Cooling, can we continue to fight terror as though it is a disease that needs a 'magic bullet' to end it?

Iraq has been a calamity. Thousands of our young people have died, and many more, disabled for life, for what? To get rid of a dictator? Have the billions spent to fight the war been well spent? And, while an end may be a light in that tunnel coming this year, are we just beginning in Afghanistan? All unnumbered questions!

One final question for every reader. Have you ever considered the possibility that Saddam Hussein's troops might have been maintaining order in USA cities had we not gone in to Iraq seven years ago? Or, that if we do not win in Afghanistan, that the Taliban might be running our schools and wearing apparel? Ridiculous? Then why did we buy the concept that war in those countries was necessary to safeguard the United States from the evil ones who hated us?

Now, those are questions we won't get into today. After all, it happens to be Easter, and thoughts for many should be elsewhere. We hope it is a Happy Easter. Amen.

Richard Carlton

April 4, 2010

Issue No. 6