The Solution In Afghanistan: Get Out - Costs Of The War Unacceptable And Unsustainable
01 March 2011By James P McGovern and Walter B
Jones
No one, it seems, wants to talk about the war in
Afghanistan. This week the House debated a budget bill
that is touted as reflecting new fiscal restraint, yet
borrows tens of billions more for the war. In an
hour-long State of the Union address last month,
President Obama devoted less than one minute to the
conflict. Given the investment and sacrifices our
country has made for nearly 10 years, the phones in
our offices should be ringing off the hook with calls
from those who are tired of being told that the United
States doesn't have enough money to extend
unemployment benefits or invest in new jobs.
But by and large, Americans are silent. The war wasn't
even an issue in the November elections, which
dominated the political discussion for much of last
year. Perhaps it is because there is no draft and only
a small percentage of our population is at risk. Or
maybe it's because no one feels that they are paying
for the war, which is being charged to the American
taxpayers' credit card.
Whatever the reasons, there is no excuse for our
collective indifference. At 112 months, this is the
longest war in our history. More than 1,400 American
service members have lost their lives in Afghanistan;
over 8,800 have been wounded in action. Tens of
thousands have suffered other disabilities or
psychological harm. The Pentagon reported in November
that suicide rates are soaring among veterans; the
backlog at the Department of Veterans Affairs had
reached more than 700,000 disability cases, according
to NPR, including post-traumatic stress disorder.
Meanwhile in Afghanistan, our so-called ally,
President Hamid Karzai, is corrupt. Transparency
International recently ranked Afghanistan as the
world's third-most corrupt country, behind only
Somalia and Burma The Afghan military and police are
not reliable partners, and Al Qaeda is someplace else.
Vice President Joe Biden said in Afghanistan last
month that "we are not leaving if you don't want us to
leave." At the NATO summit in Lisbon, the president
said that we're in Afghanistan for at least four more
years.
But for what? Why do we need to sacrifice more
American lives? Why must we continue to align
ourselves with a government that commits fraud in
elections? Instead, why aren't we using all our
resources to go after the terrorists that murdered so
many of our civilians on Sept. 11, 2001?
The new Republican majority in the House came to power
in large part by promising to control spending and
reduce the deficit. This war has already cost us more
than $450 billion; combined with the war in Iraq, it
is estimated to account for 23 percent of our deficits
since 2003.
Where is the outcry from the Tea Partyers and the
deficit hawks? Fiscal conservatives should be howling
that this war is being financed with borrowed money.
Those who support the war should be willing to pay for
it.
And where is the liberal outrage? Those of us who are
tired of being told that we can't afford green jobs,
unemployment or health care should be screaming over
our Treasury being used as an ATM when it comes to
supporting the Karzai government.
To be fair, there are a handful of prominent critics
on the left, center and right. But most Americans are
silent about the enormous sacrifice our country has
made in blood and treasure. They should be calling,
writing or otherwise speaking out.
What are we giving up to maintain the status quo?
Columbia University professor Joseph Stiglitz told the
House Veterans Affairs Committee in September that the
costs of Iraq and Afghanistan, including interest
payments on the money borrowed for these wars and care
for our wounded soldiers and veterans, is likely to
total $4 trillion to $6 trillion.
Simply put, we believe the human and financial costs
of the war are unacceptable and unsustainable.
It is bankrupting us. The United States should devise
an exit plan to extricate ourselves from Afghanistan,
not a plan to stay there four more years and "then
we'll see." This doesn't mean that we abandon the
Afghan people - rather, we should abandon this war
strategy. It is a failure that has not brought
stability to Afghanistan and has not enhanced our own
security. As the retired career Army officer Andrew
Bacevich has written, to die for a mystique is the
wrong policy.
It is easier for politicians to "go along" rather than
make waves. But we were elected to do the right thing,
not what is politically expedient. The discussion of
Afghanistan shouldn't be about politics, which we
acknowledge are difficult, but what is right for our
country. And the right thing is to end this war.
McGovern, a Democrat, represents Massachusetts' 3rd
Congressional District in the U.S. House. Jones, a
Republican, represents North Carolina's 3rd
Congressional District.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments