Would a punitive mission into Germany in 1930 been feasible and a solution to the problem of rising Nazism?
So why is this considered a reasonable excuse for why leaving Afghanistan is no big deal?
The U.S. is finally getting out of Afghanistan. While most Americans have long supported an exit, advocates of a continued U.S. military presence warn of the Afghan government’s collapse, the subjugation of women and the re-establishment of a terrorist haven.
Both sides of the debate ignore a key point: U.S. troops can go back. A permanent military presence and a permanent retreat aren’t the only military options for dealing with potential sources of transnational terrorism. Punitive expeditions—strategic raids to punish or deter hostile actors—are overdue for a return to America’s strategic tool kit.
This is moronic. I couldn't read the full story. But I sincerely doubt it redeemed itself after the firewall break. Our military understands this approach is problematic, as the kids say:
In a blunt assessment Tuesday, the top U.S. general for the Middle East told Congress it will be extremely difficult but not impossible for the U.S. to find, track and take out counterterrorism threats in Afghanistan once all American troops are withdrawn.
Advocacy for punitive raids implies more than just the ability to return to Afghanistan after we leave this year. It implies that back in 2001 we could have simply kept bombing Afghanistan with "strategic raids" until the Taliban stopped hosting al Qaeda. And until the the Taliban stopped subjugating women, too, I guess.
And in fact we know this is wrong. We tried it in Iraq. Between Desert Storm in 1991 and the Iraq War America and our allies routinely bombed Saddam's Iraq under the umbrella of enforcing no-fly zones to get him to comply with the ceasefire terms.
Saddam played that up into victim status that too many around the world bought fully. Go back in the Wayback Machine and recall accusations--from some Americans!--that America "likes to bomb brown people." Good times.
And Saddam turned more and more to Islamist ideology and greater cruelties to hold on to power. In the end, only the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq could solve the problem of Saddam's regional aggression, WMD ambitions, and sick despotism. Much like the "German problem" was only resolved in 1945 with full occupation.
Heck, South Vietnam might raise objections to that theory. If you can find their phone number to ask.
Oh, and contrary to the author's implication, the problem with Barbary pirates was not solved by our punitive mission in the Tripolitan War. We needed to maintain ships there to enforce the peace, as I noted long ago in Army magazine. And required another brief mini-war and show of force a decade later to remind the locals not to attack us. No word on the impact on the subjugation of women is recorded, of course. And ultimately the problem was only solved when France took over much of North Africa as colonies.
Without implying the same scale of action, letting enemies take control of a a country will work no better in Afghanistan than letting Hitler take control of Germany after the Allies defeated Germany in 1918.
