Although your question is a general one, I'll use Afghanistan for my response. In the first place, Afghanistan had nothing to do with 9/11 - virtually all of the terrorists were from Saudi Arabia. If the goal was to rid Afghanistan of the Taliban, too few of the Afghan men were willing to step up to the plate and join the army. Supposedly, we were to train them to be self-sufficient in protecting themselves. You can't train people who don't want to be trained to fight their own battles and we owe it to our troops (and our allies) to recognize when staying any longer in Afghanistan does not result in the stated goal. We spent billions of taxpayer money in that Allah-forsaken country only to see Afghan forces relinquish their weapons to the Taliban yesterday. So, all we have accomplished is that the now well-armed Taliban will kill us with our own weapons.
I do see the other side of the argument, but we cannot remain in Afghanistan forever and if they cannot train and sustain an army in 20 years, they are a lost cause. If they are not willing to fight and die for themselves, there is no reason we should lose our own troops in that cause. We are no safer now than we were 20 years ago in relation to Afghanistan.
That's what I don't get sweetie. Honestly. Why did it take TWENTY YEARS to figure that out? We were there illegally to begin with. Morally and ethically we had no business engaging in a war with people who did nothing to justify it. Are we just slow mentally or stupid or lacking in moral courage? TWENTY YEARS to figure out we had no business being there? What a pathetic group we are if that is how we fight our wars. Invading the innocent and battering them for decades? So much for that. We move on to the next stupid thing we are going to do. WE never learn. Because we are incapable or it or just don't give a rat's a** about any of it? Both? Thank you for your reply L! :)
I think it's less that we don't learn than war is big business. Lots of money to be made. This is what Eisenhower warned us about - the military/industrial complex.
I remember his saying that L but I honestly did not know THAT IS WHAT HE MEANT! Geez talk about being prescient. I thought he meant that military and industry would collude to work against government. That it is based on MONEY never once occurred to me. Hopeless I am. It still shocks me that people are willing anxious lusting after doing anything and everthing to make more money. I can't grasp that. I know it's true intellectually but emotionally ethically? NO WAY. Thank you for your reply! :)
Although I don't believe it has been proven, I'm pretty sure that Cheney and his company made billions of dollars in the run-up to and after we invaded Iraq and Afghanistan after that.
On the backs of the dead they made tons of money? I wonder if they will roast in he** figuratively forever after? Human life or obscene amounts of money. They always go for the dough ya know? Sigh. Thank you for your reply L. Happy Thursday to thee and thine. And so it goes.
Companies that produce good for fighting wars are in it for profit and, because most all of them have stockholders, some of the amount of money they reap in profits is allocated for dividends to stockholders. That's capitalism. I don't object to funds that are used to keep us safe from those who would try to harm us, but I do object to unnecessary wars or involvements in the affairs of other countries. Happy Thursday. :)
SpunkySenior 