How did that war on terror go?
It is commonly accepted that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were disasters, and that the “war on terror” (whatever that means) wasn’t won. But are these things true? Here’s a discussion that might be of interest. See what you think.
By the way, about the idea that the Bush administration thought the Iraq aftermath would be easy (“a cakewalk”), I beg to differ and I wrote about it in this post from 2005.
The problems in the present campaign against Iran – and they are many – stem from the fact that Iran is a much bigger country than Iraq with a larger population and a more religiously fanatical leadership unafraid to kill vast numbers of its own people, plus the IRGC has a structure that makes it exceptionally difficult to break, with power to control or threaten to control the vital Strait of Hormuz. In addition, we no longer tolerate having any boots on the ground, or nation-building of any complexity or length, and the Iranian leaders are well aware of that fact.
What the Iraq and Afghanistan wars devolved into was years of taxpayer money poured into military contractors and NGOs for services of dubious value to American security, regardless of how the military components of these wars actually went, with eager participation of both parties in Congress.
I do not think there is an electorally significant fraction of Americans eager to repeat these experiences in Iran or anywhere else. I forget what is supposed to happen after “fool me three times”.
NIketas:
We have military bases all over the world and many are of much more dubious benefit. I happen to think our postwar presence in both countries – Iraq and Afghanistan – did have some benefit, and was being maintained without a huge footprint. However, I’m not arguing – nor do I think the panel in that video is arguing – that we should have stayed indefinitely. But both pullouts were utterly mishandled.
FWIW, the “War On Terror” is never won. Ever. Terror is a concept. To its devotees an incredibly useful one psychologically. Fighting it is fought upon cultural battlefields, in the war of ideas, where it is unlikely to ever be vanquished.
Regarding Iraq and Afghanistan? Disasters. Unmitigated. Still being paid for, and years possibly decades from being paid off. Oh and the credit card balance keeps getting added to while it’s happening btw. My favorite is still that we “spent 20 years and $2.5 trillion to replace the Taliban with the Taliban”. It’s sardonically funny because it’s true.
Democracy promotion and “nation building” are fools errands. The Middle East is not a place where its denizens deserve the former or are really capable of the latter. It’s a cultural dumpster fire, and Bush and the neocons proved what many who advised otherwise had been saying so for years before.
Everything is a waste in those wastelands. Most especially dollars. Even more so blood.
Except the twelvers and IRGC with a nuke and ICBMs are not the same as the Taliban or Sadam, but peddlers of conventional wisdom ignore that fundamental. Because hindsight is perfect.
Reasons.
Unwillin Bar-Kiss:
They make that point in the video – that of course it can’t be “won.” It’s always ongoing. But has it been mostly successful in the last 25 years? That’s the question they try to answer.
If you haven’t watched the video, you might want to take a listen. You might still end up disagreeing, of course.
This has been a recurring theme on Commentary for some time now – that Iraq has largely been pacified and that the lack of large successful terror attacks on U.S. soil is evidence of some real success in the war on terror. This is the first full podcast devoted to the subject as far as I know.
I thought the podcast was great and very thought provoking. I love Commentary. One of the very few organizations, along with this website, that actually get any of my money. Thanks for posting.