President Trump: The only America First Afghan policy is to get out of Afghanistan

Just when you think that you have heard all of the asinine ideas possible about U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, out comes one that is so hideously ridiculous that you must assume the authors are demented and writing from a well-secured asylum.

The quote below comes from an article about the future of U.S. involvement in Afghanistan that was in the USA Today Network on 14 July 2017. The article discusses several U.S. options in Afghanistan, but the one that takes the cake is the brainchild of two champions of the war in Iraq, who — as Tucker Carlson correctly said about Max Boot — can be relied on to propose ideas that will start unnecessary and always losing wars for the republic. The article’s authors are Michael O’Hanlon, an analyst from the Brookings Institution, who was orgasmic over invading Iraq, and the former general/now-felon David Petraeus, who lost the war in Iraq and helped lose the one in Afghanistan The article refers to some recent work by these two brain-dead beauties.

“O’Hanlon also co-authored a piece in the Wall Street Journal with former CIA Director and four-star general David Petraeus that takes aim at most of the opposing views of continuing the war and argues that the U.S. must consider Afghanistan the center of a generation-long fight against extremism with no definition of “victory.” (1)

Mr. Trump, these two men are war-mongering, elitist, money-grubbing idiots. There is no need for the United States to participate in “generation-long fight against extremism” that is centered in Afghanistan; indeed, there is no longer any plausible reason for America to be engaged in any war in Afghanistan. U.S. military forces have been there since October, 2001, and the security situation in the country is far more in favor of the Taleban — and increasingly the Islamic State — than it was 16 years ago, not even Kabul is secure.

In addition, the morons of U.S. foreign policy-making have been involved in only part of what is now the Afghan Islamists’ 40-plus year fight against foreign/infidel occupation, the first stirrings of which began in 1977-78 against the USSR’s puppet communist regime in Kabul. In these 40 years the Afghan Islamists and their various allies — Pakistani mujahedin, al-Qaeda, Arab volunteers, Chinese Uighurs, etc. — have worn out all foreign occupiers, even though they had no air cover and little in the way of artillery or other heavy arms. The Soviets could not win with a 120,ooo-man Red Army force, and U.S. and NATO generals could not win with a force of the same size and air assets far greater than the Soviets employed.

You will note in the above quote, Mr. President, that the two geniuses want you to agree to a war that has “no definition of ‘victory'”. This, Sir, is because the two authors — and most U.S. and NATO generals — are chronic losers who never want to win a war, but only to prolong it so that the taxpayer gravy-train upon which they gorge continues forever. If your generals are trying to sell such slop — and Petraeus often speaks for that lot of losers, including McMaster — pull on you businessman’s hat and recognize that these charlatans are trying to get you to sign a contract to build something that neither you nor anyone else can ever build (a stable, secular, democratic Afghanistan with an effective military); a contract that offers no hint of what the final cost will be in lives, limbs, and tax dollars; and a contract that has no completion date, and clearly states that the project may never be completed.

If your are the businessman you are reputed to be, Mr. President, you will take the republic by the hand and get it permanently out of Afghanistan as quickly as possible. If the generals oppose this utterly necessary America First policy, Mr. President, cashier several hundred of them and urge them sign up to become Afghan Field Marshals and then go to glory by fighting and dying alongside the Afghan forces they have failed to train to even a minimal military proficiency over the past 16 years.

Mr. President, Afghanistan always has been America’s easiest foreign policy-problem. Several thousand years of human history have clearly and repeatedly demonstrated that unless a foreign invader/occupier annihilates most Afghans and then colonizes their country, the occupier will go home the loser — if he can fight his way out. The Afghans, Sir, cannot be worn out, demoralized, or made into model secular citizens. They are, after all, fighting for their faith, their land, their tribe, and their god against non-Muslim foreign invaders/occupiers who threaten each.

Like all other human groupings, Mr. President, the Afghans — like the Imperial Japanese — can be obliterated, but they cannot be beaten by the same sort of half-hearted,  undersized, and politically correct military pin-pricks that your generals have called war since 2001, nor will they ever accept the kind “compromise peace” that is so beloved by your feckless diplomats. If your military, diplomatic, and intelligence minions tell you something to the contrary, put on your best New York accent and tell them that they are a  “damn bunch of full-of-shit fools”, and that your done throwing good American lives and money after bad. Then order them to get all Americans out of Afghanistan, and to do so lickety split.






Be Sociable, Share!
This entry was posted in Articles and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to President Trump: The only America First Afghan policy is to get out of Afghanistan

  1. Dolly Prenzel says:

    Thanks again, Mike, for another well-reasoned article based on fact not fiction, on reality not visions of a glowing, peaceful future in which all nations of the world pay homage to the United States and implement democratic governments. What utter hogwash these people preach. I just turned 71 – my entire life has been war and the winds of war, with very little to show for it. The USA MUST STOP NOW. No more intervention.

    All the way back to the early days of Bin Laden, I have valued your insights and opinions. I have always listened for your voice. Now that I no longer watch any television but rely principally on the WSJ, your on-line presence is greatly appreciated. Please keep up the good work. Thank you. Dolly Prenzel, Nashville, TN

    • Mike Scheuer says:

      Thank you for this too-kind note. It is one that I will keep. I am 64 and my memory mirrors yours, and I am ashamed that it took me nearly thirty years to fully realize what interventionism was doing to the republic and its citizens and economy. After age 30 I fought it as best I could inside CIA, but failed. Since the then I have fought it full time, and failed again. Still it must be stopped, so I will keep pitching. Again, thank you for your note. It will be dear to me whenever I think of it. MFS

  2. Bill says:

    America will never get out of Afghanistan before the CIA gets out of opium poppies.

    • Mike Scheuer says:

      Thank you for writing. I wonder sometimes. In 1999-2001, I was part of a CIA team that map out the major \”heroin factories\” in Afghanistan for destruction. After 9/11, the complete data and maps on the Afghan heroin industry was delivered to the Pentagon to guide them in destroying it. The word that came back from the Pentagon was that \”DoD is not in the anti-narcotics business.\” Maybe DoD was not the only one. MFS

  3. Putin says:

    You just got Trumpanze’d in your butthole, Donald the dick just hired one of your dumb ass intervention generals.

    In a 2014 speech regarding the War on Terror, Kelly said:
    “If you think this war against our way of life is over because some of the self-appointed opinion-makers and chattering class grow ‘war weary,’ because they want to be out of Iraq or Afghanistan, you are mistaken. This enemy is dedicated to our destruction. He will fight us for generations, and the conflict will move through various phases as it has since 9/11.”[20]

    • Mike Scheuer says:

      Thank you for writing. No shit about Kelly. Trump will now have to get rid of him and McMaster at some point. I must admit, though, that you have a point. I worked at CIA for nearly a quarter of a century and encountered a lot of odd reactions to proposals for protecting America. I was too quick to attribute these rebuffs to the fact that I was dealing with morons, time-servers or cowards. Perhaps naively, I never bought into the \”deep state\” rhetoric, but now the scales have fallen from my eyes almost completely. I did not see what an extraordinarily disloyal, criminal, and self-serving mess Trump inheriting — and I should have. His infatuation with U.S. generals is inexplicable, they have not won a god-damned thing since 1945 but have just about sucked the taxpayer\’s dry. Perhaps Bannon is now on the outside in order to be a talent scout to find men and women to replace the generals and Goldman-Sachs boys with Americans in a White House massacre of sorts? I just do not know what to think. That said the republic cannot tolerate these attacks on Trump and survive. The list of the republic\’s U.S. enemies is very long, but we are a country blessed with ample rope and trees. MFs

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *