Another Casualty of Iraq: Afghanistan

By: Lowell
Published On: 5/30/2006 6:39:19 AM

Aside from all the problems in Iraq itself, one unfortunate side effect of the U.S. decision to invade that country in 2003 was that we pulled forces, equipment, intelligence assets and attention away from another fight: the more important one against the Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists in Afghanistan.  Now, not surprisingly, the Taliban are resurgent in Afghanistan, and the overall security situation appears to be deteriorating rapidly.

Sad to say, but the problems we're seeing in Afghanistan right now are a direct result of the Bush Administration's incompetence in running two - or three, depending on how you count them - wars at once.  In October 2004, the Washington Post ran a detailed analysis of the Bush strategy in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the "war on terror" in general.  The article directly addresses the costs to Afghanistan and the "war on terror" of the Bush Administration's decision to go to war in Iraq:

These elite forces, along with the battlefield intelligence technology of Predator and Global Hawk drone aircraft, were the scarcest tools of the hunt for jihadists along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. With Bush's shift of focus to Iraq, the special mission units called most of their troops home to prepare for a new set of high-value targets in Baghdad.

"There is a direct consequence for us having taken these guys out prematurely," said Leverett, who then worked as senior director for Middle Eastern affairs on Bush's NSC staff. "There were people on the staff level raising questions about what that meant for getting al Qaeda, for creating an Afghan security and intelligence service [to help combat jihadists]. Those questions didn't get above staff level, because clearly there had been a strategic decision taken."

A "strategic decision," in other words, to take out Saddam Hussein, who had no weapons of mass destruction and no ties to the "war on terror," instead of finishing Job #1 in Afghanistan.  This represented bad judgement at the minimum, total incompetence at the maximum.  We witnessed the results of the Bush obsession with Saddam at Tora Bora in late 2001, where Osama Bin Laden escaped.  And we are witnessing the results again today in Kabul, where we have never had sufficient forces to secure the country and to complete the mission. 

Mission accomplished, as Bush said three years ago?  Not in Iraq.  Not in Afghanistan. And not in the "war on terror."  Heck of a job, Rummy - and Cheney, and Bushie, and those who vote with Dubya 97% of the time, like George Allen.


Comments



We need REAL leadership (Info_Tech_Guy - 5/30/2006 9:15:59 AM)
We need Jim Webb in the Senate to offer up the sort of criticism and expertise necessary to redirect American military and foreign policies. The failed Bush policies must be challenged. (Harris Miller would never defeat and imagining "go along, get along" pro-Iraq war Miller showing spine on this issue is laughable.)


Appropriate title (Dan - 5/30/2006 9:46:46 AM)
Absolutely.  We bailed on Bin Laden, and our paying the consequences.  Just like Bush to "give up" and "cut and run" on Afghanistan when his poll numbers were slipping. So much waste in Iraq, and losing Afghanistan back to the ruthless is inexcusable.  Perhaps it might be losing both in Afghanistan and Iraq that makes President Bush the worst in history.  The unfortunate thing about having the worst President in history is that generations will have to suffer the consequences.