Divorces are never easy affairs. America is not used to losing wars after a decisive role in two global 20th century wars, and I can recall as a kid watching the chaos and panic as the final US helicopters took off from Saigon, leaving behind hundreds, even thousands of desperate natives betrayed by the inevitable exit. There is a sense of déjà vu in our departing an even longer conflict. Ironically, at least 2,448 US military and 3,846 US contractors have died (never mind numerous others permanently disabled) in a war motivated by the nearly 3000 civilian casualties of 9/11. As I prepare to publish this post, I saw a notification from National Review (no, not a subscriber) on an editorial/story blasting Biden's "dishonorable" exit; I really don't want to read a neo-con perspective on current events. There was never going to be a "good" time to cut our losses in Bush's fateful wrong decision, enabled by a 9/11-shocked Congress, to intervene, not motivated by any Taliban 9/11 operation but its safe haven for terrorist mastermind UBL. For years, we were preparing for our inevitable departure, supporting a democratic government and training its military to transition to handling affairs on their own. At some point, Dad has to take the training wheels off the bike. You can't convince me an extra 6 months or a few years will succeed where the last 19 years didn't. We can't be held hostage to a bad decision made almost 20 years ago.
As we have seen the predictable collapse of the inept Afghanistan government and military as the American forces have withdrawn boots on the ground (one of the few Biden initiatives I've supported), the inevitable blame game has started. If you look at the wild world of Twitter, you had many different trends: Barbara Lee trended as the "courageous" sole federal legislator who voted against Afghanistan intervention; Marianne Williamson, an early 2020 candidate for the Dem POTUS nomination, worried about the impending gender holocaust, playing off one of Bush's sham rationalizations for staying the course in Afghanistan; both parties blamed the other's most recent President for the unfolding chaos there (Trump's own timeline for leaving Afghanistan), Trump calling on Biden to resign for mishandling the crisis and Pompeo insisting the same Trump who assassinated an Iranian general would never have allowed this debacle.
I was never comfortable with the idea of invading Afghanistan; I knew how the Soviets had failed and their logistics chain was much closer than ours in conducting a long war. The libertarian side of me today would have been more explicit and strident back then; I think back then, in the aftermath of 9/11, I did think some military response was appropriate, although I was wary of an invasion and I had some naïve faith that Bush, who had access to better information than I had, would make the right decision. What irritated me about Obama was his tendency to split differences, e.g., at manpower. I felt in dealing with combat you either staff it properly to meet objectives or you withdraw; you don't play political games in the middle of a war.
Afghanistan would turn out to be the longest war in US history. Was it worth the sacrifice of American blood and treasure? No. Was it worth the property damage in Afghanistan, countless Afghan lives and shattered families? No. Some partisan Dems point out that we never found UBL in Afghanistan (although I've seen some reports some GI's came very close to his cave in an Afghanistan mountain) but in Pakistan. You don't invade a country for the aim of going after 1 person and/or his military associates. I think the raid in Pakistan proved that. I do think that Bush had other political goals with the invasion: he wanted to send a message to other nations and/or terrorist groups there would be a price to pay for aiding and abetting terrorists plotting against American lives. To a large extent, that message has been heard; the Taliban were in exile for much of the past 20 years. And many other nations have felt the sting of undeclared American drone wars under Bush through Biden, which I oppose. America is not served well by assaults on civilian lives and casualties; we've planted the seeds of vengeance.
Are we responsible for Taliban reprisals against Afghanistan civilians? No. Don't get me wrong: I think the US has a moral obligation to help the Afghan translators who collaborated with us over the past generation; I'm not sure that plays well with right-wing nativists. But we are not the policeman to the world. I'm sure the Taliban have done crimes against humanity. But we have no open-ended obligation to defend Afghanis. Our military is constitutionally limited to our self-defense, and Afghanistan is not strategic to our security. If and when the Taliban regain power in Afghanistan, they will be accountable for what happens. I would hope that rumors of reprisals are more propaganda to rationalize continuation of our occupation, that the Taliban have learned lessons from their exile from power. Does the Taliban have a score to settle over what's transpired during its exodus? Perhaps. But remember the Serenity Prayer.
