Posted on 03/12/2012 1:20:37 PM PDT by trappedincanuckistan
Americans — left, right, Democrats and Republicans — are all sick of thankless nation-building in the Middle East. Yet democratization was not our first choice, but rather a last resort after prior failures.
The U.S. had long ago supplied Afghan insurgents, who expelled the Soviets after a decade of fighting. Then we left. The country descended into even worse medievalism under the Taliban. So after removing the Taliban, who had hosted the perpetrators of 9/11, we promised in 2001 to stay on.
We won the first Gulf War in 1991. Then most of our forces left the region. The result was the mass murder of the Iraqi Kurds and Shiites, 12 years of no-fly zones, and a failed oil-for-food embargo of Saddam's Iraq. So after removing Saddam in 2003, we tried to leave behind something better.
In the last 10 years the U.S. has spent more than $1 trillion and has lost thousands of American lives in Iraq and Afghanistan. Both places seem far better off than when ruled by the Taliban and Saddam Hussein — at least for a while.
Yet the Iraqis now bear Americans little good will. They seem friendlier to Iran and Syria than to their liberators. In Afghanistan, riots continue over the mistaken burning of defaced Qurans, despite serial U.S. apologies.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...
That's why he's got that perpetual smirk on his puss.
He knows he can hit Perle up for another billion or two.
“I believe Germany and Japan did most of their rebuilding themselves, unlike Afghanistan & Iraq where we gave them most of it.
It’s an example of how welfare does not work on the international level either.”
There was the Marshall Plan, which along with the GI Bill is perpetually put forward as an example of Big Government spurring the postwar economic boom.
“For example, after WWII, there was a coal shortage. With winter approaching available coal was routed to France, the UK, etc. Germany was slighted because it was felt that the US occupation force would have fewer problems shooting German civilians if they rioted”
Not that I don’t believe you, but how much was perception and how much reality? How likely was it that a German citizen would be shot, and how often were U.S. soldiers arrested in the aftermath? How easy will it be decades from now to warp random instances of shooting civilians, pissing on corpses, and disrespecting (or not) holy texts into a pattern of brutality? Afghans are doing that already.
"Nation Building" in the Third World has not only been in violation of our Constitution; it has been a very flawed concept. (For example, see Democracy In Third World--Destructive Egalitarian Myth.)
William Flax
“Are you saying that we won in Iraq and Afghanistan?”
Yes and no, depending on what you’re talking about. You can’t say we didn’t win anything. What else can you call crushing the Republican Guard and routing the Taliban? They’re not in power anymore, even if nothing permanent has taken their place.
What we didn’t win was “the peace.” Nor have we made much headway with that nation-building thing candidate Bush promised he wouldn’t try. Whether we’ve accomplished anything of lasting value is impossible to say, though doubtful. Still, you can’t say we didn’t win anything.
“They keeled over backwards not to even scratch a ‘civilian’ brick or mortar.”
I realize Germany and Japan got it relatively worse, almost to the point where it can seem like setting the World Series next to a little league game. But that’s the way war with Third Worlders works. We dropped more ordnance on Vietnam than all theaters of WWII combined, or something like that, without pictures like you posted to show for it. That’s because we weren’t hitting heavy industry or population centers, for the simple reason that, like Iraq and Afghanistan, they didn’t have heavy industry or a dense population.
We continue to rely on Death From Above, as in WWII. It’s just less so, largely because there’s less to destroy. Also because pretty much everyone realizes firebombing tens of thousands of people per run was overkill and unecessary. Still, if you think we didn’t destroy any buildings or kill any civilians in Iraq or Afghanistan, I have a bridge to sell you.
I got that out of a history book about post-war Germany. We were HARD on the Germans. If we wanted a house, we commandeered it and the family went out into the street. The German economy essentially ran on cigarettes until about 1947 or 48. Dunno ‘bout shooting them, but there were some pretty broad sweeps looking for Nazi criminals.
Here is some notes from Jack D. Hunter (author of The Blue Max):
http://www.jackhunter.com/BlueMaxOTFInfo.htm
http://www.jackhunter.com/01-05-08.htm
The entirety of WWII was brutal, the Pacific more so than the European. Never think for a second that it was a “good clean war.” I don’t think that such a thing ever existed.
As for warping “random instances of shooting civilians, pissing on corpses, and disrespecting (or not) holy texts into a pattern of brutality,” the Afghans won’t have to do it, our own media will. There is no reason to care what the Afghanis think of us (we should be killing them whenever they cross us...). We need to explain to the media the difference between “First Amendment Rights” and “giving aid and comfort, treason, and subversion.”
“There is no reason to care what the Afghanis think of us”
There is if we want to nation build, which is why nation building is sucha fool’s errand.
You can “nation build” better if you don’t care what the savages think.
For example, I don’t care what my kids think (much). I’m their father, not their friend. They don’t have to like me, they can hate me if they like. I’m here to protect them, provide for them, see that they educated and disciplined, and that they otherwise enter society as competent and civil human beings, not savages (which is what kids start out as...).
Same thing goes for a conquered nation. We’re their conquerors, not their friends. Do it our way, do it when we tell you - or die. They’ll understand why, eventually. They don’t have to understand right now, and they certainly don’t need to like us. They just need to be very, very afraid of us.
I think, aside from the cultural differences, that is why the Germans and Japanese recovered so well. They’d seen their nations utterly ruined, they knew we could do it again with no problems, and they were very appropriately afraid of us.
In Iraq the Muzzies are driving out the Christians and other non-Muzzie faiths. The Shia sect will oppress the Sunnis and ties between Iraq and Iran will continue to grow.
The Taliban are still in Afghanistan. When we leave there they’ll return to power even if it takes a civil war.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.