The Pot Called the Kettle What?

The Japanese have compared our military occupation of Afghanistan similar to the Russian military occupation of Afghanistan at the end of the Cold War.  A lot of critics of the "War on Terror" have mentioned the irony of fighting against the very eople that we armed to fight the Commies.  Funny story, the Afghanis feel the same way.  That might be why Al Qaeda and the Taleban, two separate organizations, are both doing so well at recruiting new members.  It's not even really difficult since most of them are either from or travel regularly to Pakistan, which I'll address in a different blog, and Iran.

It especially doesn't help that so many of the victims are women and children.  The problem with bombs is that they neither recognize nor care about what they destroy.  Smart bombs are only smart in that they are more accurate.  For every woman, child, or noncombatant that is killed, the Taleban are able to intelligently follow up with the family to recruit new members.  Every bomb that goes off only strengthens our enemy.

We aren't fighting a standard war any more.  Afghanistan does not have a national army that is going to meet our army on the field of battle for prearranged terms.  Hitler, Napoleon, and Genghis Khan all fought armies.  We are fighting insurgents.  We are fighting very dedicated individuals on their land under their terms.  As we saw in Vietnam, the Army is not equipped to fight against these guerilla tactics.  Terrorists do not follow the rules of engagement because they are not government-sanctioned; they don't have to follow the rules they are fighting against.  

We can not afford to go into a ninth year of pointless, and expensive, combat.  With the economy drooping its head more every day, how much longer can we afford to waste money in a country that isn't ours?  We don't even import anything from Afghanistan.  While more ground troops would be very good at going through every home and killing every person who is the least bit suspicious, that won't do anything except make the problem worse.  We must use diplomacy to achieve peace, and time to achieve progress.

If I've said it once, I've said it a million times, we can't do it alone.  Afghanistan is half a world away, we don't share any cultural background that would help us to know the best negotiation tactics.  Who does?  Iran.  Did I say Iran?  Yes.  Positively?  Yes.  Aren't they evil?  No, they are a long-standing Middle Eastern democracy whose leaders are attempting to impose Western standards.  Mahmoud Ahmadinajed has wanted to open conversation with the United States for several years now and has already tried to open talks with Barack Obama, who said he would talk with Iran during the primaries.  Iran shares a border with Afghanistan and is tired of opium and terrorists flowing freely through the borders as people flee our bombs.  George W. Bush has said that Iran is evil because they want to build nuclear weapons.  Iran wants to do anything it must to be taken seriously as a world power.  Serious talks with Iran to allow a Muslim-led force to take over anti-terrorist operations in Afghanistan would go a very long way to improve relations between Iran and every other country in the world.

Does America always have to unilaterally decide what course of action is best for everyone else?  Is the current push to universalize liberal democratic capitalism so much different than Stalin's drive to globalize communism?