Thursday, June 23, 2011

The Empire Draws Back

President Obama is pulling troops out of Afghanistan and he said something that was useful and interesting in his remarks last night:

We will not try to make Afghanistan a perfect place. We will not police its streets or patrol its mountains indefinitely.

That is the responsibility of the Afghan government, which must step up its ability to protect its people; and move from an economy shaped by war to one that can sustain a lasting peace.
It's about time that an American president said such a thing, but it holds true for many places other than Afghanistan. We have troops stationed all over the world and we're long overdue to ask why that is.

We have, for nearly 70 years now, been running an empire. It's been a mostly benevolent empire, but we've had an unmistakable presence in Europe and Asia ever since World War II ended. In many cases, the enemy we saw is no longer a factor -- there is no threat that the Red Army is going to crash through the Fulda Gap any time soon, to use just one example.

The conversation I'm contemplating probably should have happened 20 years ago, but we've always found a reason to maintain what we've been doing. The questions still merit discussion. Why does the military have troops all over the world? And what are those troops doing?

I'm not convinced that deploying the military to be armed social workers is necessarily a wise use of our time, treasure and talent, but that has been the mission, especially in Afghanistan. We can't draw back from the world, because the world will not draw back from us. But we can recalibrate how we respond.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Mr D is an isolationist! Who knew?

Mr. D said...

No, I'm not an isolationist. Read it again. I wrote:

We can't draw back from the world, because the world will not draw back from us. But we can recalibrate how we respond.

I don't assume that we'll be able to pull troops back from all over the world any time soon. But we shouldn't hesitate to look at what we're doing and question whether it makes sense. Defending Germany from the Red Army is just one excellent example.

Brad Carlson said...

Bottom line is only the Afghans have a larger interest in the stability of their country (uhhh...I hope they do). As such, they need to take the reins eventually.

I was also struck by the President's remarks of how much of our treasury has been depleted in paying for this war and that we need to start investing in the rebuilding of America (yes, he's in full campaign mode). While I agree with that sentiment, I have ZERO faith the current administration will "invest" those funds wisely.

Night Writer said...

I'm reminded of the Tom Lehrer lyrics:

Once all the Germans were warlike and mean,
but that couldn't happen again.
We taught them a lesson in 1918, and they've hardly bothered us since then.


Not that I'm too concerned about the Germans, but I don't think the Poles and Czechs sleep comfortably in the shadow of Russia which continues to undermine us around the world. The Japanese would like to have us out of Okinawa but the Pacific is still too strategic in today's economy to not maintain a naval presence and it takes quite a few bases to support a fleet in the vastness of that geography as we head deeper into the Chinese century.

That said, we could do with a fewer bases around the world, though picking which ones might provoke as much of a political fight as any other government entitlement. The "Military Industrial Complex" that Ike warned of is not a myth.

Anonymous said...

I guess I could agree with the sentiment as stated, but when was the last time you believed a single utterance from this pathological liar and myth maker?

Yes, we could have recalibrated Afghanistan like we did Iraq after the surge, but the Afghan surge was too small, by Obama's choice, and the drawdown is too quick, by Obama's choice. As Limbaugh said, Obama has just announced that we are accepting defeat.

J. Ewing

Mr. D said...

Good comments, all.

Brad, I agree -- there's no reason to believe that Obama's "investments in America" are desirable.


NW said:

I don't think the Poles and Czechs sleep comfortably in the shadow of Russia which continues to undermine us around the world.

True, but we could "recalibrate" and take that into account.

JE said:

I guess I could agree with the sentiment as stated, but when was the last time you believed a single utterance from this pathological liar and myth maker?

I'd say 2008, when he told us he wanted to be President. Since then, maybe not so much.

Anonymous said...

We are going to need to maintain a military presense throughout the world to hopefully keep our boot on the necks of our creditors to whom we will either choose to pay back with watered down currency, or engage in default altogether. Apparently we aren't getting loans from any of the Poppy Farmers, at least not yet.


Our socialist president is in over way over his head!

Gino said...

dont worry, after we pull troops out of (insert name of anyplace here), the neocons will just find somebody who needs to learn about our democracy.
because thats what armies are for, arent they?

W.B. Picklesworth said...

I vote for D.C.