Rep. Eric Massa (D-NY): '2951 days in Afghanistan is enough'

[bigtree]

from HuffPo: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-eric-jj-massa/2951-days-in-afghanistan_b_347304.html


November 5, 2009

Last night, November 4th, I spoke on the floor of the House of Representatives to mark the 2,950th day of the war in Afghanistan and formalized my call to draw this conflict to a conclusion. As a freshman member of Congress that served in the United States Navy for 24 years, it has been my honor to serve on the House Armed Services Committee and the House Homeland Security Committee, and because of my background and experience, I think it's my duty to speak out on this issue.

To date, according to the non-partisan Congressional Research Service, the American taxpayer has spent or committed $3,000,000,000 to fund this war. That breaks down to:

• $101,694,915.25 per day for 2,950 days;
• $986.84 per person since our population is roughly 304 million;
• $3,947.36 for each American family of four.

And the greatest cost of this war is of course the 912 American troops killed, and 4,198 wounded. This of course does not include the thousands of internal wounds that our troops must bear for the rest of their lives.

My fellow Americans, the time to bring this war to a conclusion is now and we must stand with a clear voice and demand it. The war in Afghanistan has lasted five times longer than World War I and twice as long as World War II. When 1/3 of Hamid Karzai's ballots were thrown out for voting fraud and Abdullah Abdullah declined the runoff election due to the rampant corruption in the system, the world saw what we already knew - it is simply impossible to impose a democracy on a nation that does not want it.

If terrorist threats to our Nation reemerge from Afghanistan, we will strike, but we are not an occupying force.

If you agree with me on this issue, I need your help to promote this diary and I ask that you forward this to your friends as well. Let's tell the Leadership of the House and the White House that enough is enough. Our military has done everything they've been asked and it is time to conclude this war.

Thank you,

Eric Massa
Member of Congress

[Kolesar]

1. I see an analogue to America propping up a S. Vietnamese gov't that the people hated

And the Viet Cong worked in opposition to this government. I am no expert on the Vietnam War. If anybody knows this story better, please enlighten me (us).

[bigtree]

4. Afghanistan's Saigon trap

from the Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/03/afghanistan-karzai-uk-us

. . . a counter-insurgency strategy dependent on improving the legitimacy of the Afghan government has foundered as the US finds itself in a similar position to the one it faced in South Vietnam: supporting an illegitimate government with a diminishing ability to control its own territory, all the while trying to find a way not to lose the war.

. . . To turn the tide in Afghanistan, the US and UK need to avoid the Saigon trap: supporting and bankrolling an illegitimate government indefinitely, out of a lack of better alternatives. Just as many US and international officials are now disgusted with Karzai, many US officials were repulsed by the corrupt and nepotistic regime of Ngo Dinh Diem in South Vietnam in the early 1960s. But fear of the Communists and a lack of better ideas meant that Diem was given a long leash, which he then used to steal elections and install family members in government. Just as it was in Vietnam, the US is unwilling to take on the burden of fighting and governing itself, yet it does not trust its partner enough to allow it to succeed or fail on its own terms.

To avoid the Saigon trap, the US needs to seek ways to restore its leverage over the Karzai government. At present, the US is punching beneath its weight in Afghanistan – precisely because the mission is so important. Obama has called Afghanistan the "necessary war" and promised to redouble efforts to repair its governance and beat back the Taliban insurgency. But the perverse consequence of throwing his full support behind Nato efforts was to signal to the Afghan government that the US could not afford to lose, thus undercutting American leverage in the region where it is needed most.

[FiveGoodMen]

2. More than enough since we absolutely never should have been there at all.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. When stuck in hole stop digging. Alas, favorable PR is more important than lives. k&r