UPDATES AT BOTTOM
While it is true that Afghanistan was the "real" front, which Cheney (and Bush) lost focus on by fabricated a reason to go to war in Iraq, it is still a lose-lose situation. Need I remind the Cold Warriors that this is how the US trapped and defeated the Soviet Union? Apparently I do. The latest news is as follows (h/t to Bill Roggio):
"Within 24 hours of the leak of the Afghanistan assessment to The Washington Post, General Stanley McChrystal's team fired its second shot across the bow of the Obama administration. According to McClatchy, military officers close to General McChrystal said he is prepared to resign if he isn't given sufficient resources (read "troops") to implement a change of direction in Afghanistan"
The Conservatives are of course stunned (read the comments, they are priceless), since Afghanistan, not Iraq is the new front in the war on terror. The reality is of course that Iraq was never part of that front and in getting stuck in Iraq, we have lost Afghanistan already (which I warned against ages ago).
The people who screamed that if we left Iraq, chaos would prevail in the Middle East have created this horror. Afghanistan is absolutely something that is rife with extremist and terrorist groups, not the least of which is the Taliban. More importantly, Pakistan -with its nukes - is supplying part of the chaos in Afghanistan. We cannot win this one, just as the Soviets could not win it. Yet we cannot drop Afghanistan at this stage either, not entirely anyway. But we can and should re-group, with a strategy not more casualties. Do we want to deplete the remaining military and financial resources we have left on a losing battle?
Sure, we would look weak. But is not better to look weak than actually be weakened?
We are already in a financial crisis. Our own nation is falling apart. Where are we to get the additional resources and finances to fund yet another surge in a country that has already defeated one Cold War empire?
Cheney and the Neo-cons lost Afghanistan for us. They also empowered Iran and managed also to destabilize Pakistan. What a legacy. McChrystal did not, however, threaten to resign at any point during the Bush-Cheney fiasco after fiasco. Where was the General when the Iraq war plans were being put together - and the evidence fabricated? Was he worried about success in Afghanistan then?
Yet General McChrystal - a Cheney loyalist - is threatening to resign now? Why? Come to think of it, where was the right-wing when all of us were concerned that Afghanistan would be lost if we went into Iraq?
My suggestion? Fine. Resign then. Perhaps someone with an actual strategy other than the looting of the US treasury might be better for this effort in any case.
Anyone who plays chess should see the obvious: we must lose this particular battle to win the larger effort, which has always been about the ISI backed (Pakistan) and Saudi funded terrorist groups in both Pakistan and Afghanistan. In other words, the actual people behind the attacks of September 11, 2001. We cannot use military force in Pakistan as they have nukes. We cannot use military force in Saudi Arabia, as they have the oil we are addicted to (and American corporations would not let us). Afghanistan is not a war we can win, not right now and not the way we have been going about it (McChrystal via Jeff Huber).
So our only option is two-pronged: to focus our efforts on a covert effort to secure the nukes in Pakistan and an overt effort to cut our dependency on the Saudis for oil, which means taking tougher measures with US oil companies. Once we are free of the House of Saud's blackmail, we can address the flow of cash to Pakistan.
McChrystal, however, is owned and I have a strong feeling that should he resign, he will have no problem ending up on the board of a military contractor.
We can't win this through military conflict, not at this point and not in Afghanistan. The Soviets are proof of that. We should pull back and refocus our efforts on fighting terrorism at its root: finances. We should also focus our efforts on securing the nukes in Pakistan, because that is the biggest danger to our nation. We cannot hold Iraq and Afghanistan both and since we have built a base in Iraq, we are not leaving that country any time soon. Afghanistan, however, is another matter. Again, we might look weak, but that would be better than actually being weakened. A covert (intel based) strategy is the only option we have given the crisis we find ourselves in.
As for McChrystal, he should be stripped of his uniform and in any case, be brought to the Hague with Cheney and Bush for his role in the torture crimes.
Or in short: buh bye McChrystal
UPDATE I:
Andrew Sullivan addresses this very well here.
This blogger (a vet) has a right-wing perspective (which I entirely disagree with, respectfully). Why do I disagree? Because McChrystal sudden "conscience" is the problem. He seems to have only grown one in the last few months, but not during the last eight years.
Steve Hynd points out something very interesting, suggesting propaganda is in play.
