President Obama has announced that the US troops are not leaving Afghanistan. And that’s the right thing to do. You can’t mess things up, and then run away at the first sign of trouble, leaving your allies to die because you’ve grown bored with them.
As we discussed earlier today, the US military is a lot less good at fighting* than it is at making important symbolic gestures with its presence or absence. The symbolism of leaving Afghanistan right now would be worse than the symbolism of staying.
* Not being good at warfare is actually a good sign. It means that life in the country is good and the value of human existence is high. The best fighters are those who prefer death to going back home to their horrible lives or those who still are just beginning to construct their nation-state.
Clarissa's Blog 
“the US military is a lot less good at fighting* than it is at making important symbolic gestures with its presence or absence.”
This line slayed me. 😀
LikeLike
The US military does just fine when it’s in an existentialist war for national survival. (WWII — We beat Japan essentially alone, and don’t try to tell me the Russians could have defeated Nazi Germany without U.S. help, mainly air power destroying German industry. They couldn’t.)
But we don’t do well in non-existentialist wars because the government, and ultimately U.S. citizens, aren’t willing to make the prolonged effort and sacrifices necessary to complete the job.
LikeLike
The Russians didn’t defeat shit. The Soviet people did.
LikeLike
Only a tiny part of Russia was even touched by the war, by the way. In the meanwhile, the entire territory of Ukraine and Belarus was under occupation. And it was the unparalleled guerrilla effort of the people in the guerrilla forces that crippled the Nazis. The regular troops with their ridiculously incompetent leaders were making one costly mistake after another.
LikeLike
You’re right — I should know better than to use the term “Russian” in a generic manner when I’m talking to a Ukrainian! Mia culpa…
LikeLike