I'm speaking of course of the idea of hosting the Taliban at Camp David, a mountain retreat reserved since the Eisenhower era for dignitaries, heads of state and legitimate governments' military leaders.
Compounding the insanity of hosting them at all was going to be the timing: the week of September 11.
The word "fortunately" certainly cannot be employed to depict the immediate cause of the cancellation of these talks: yet another Taliban car bombing in Kabul that killed and wounded dozens, but it's good indeed that the invitation was rescinded.
It's telling that the "conservatives" who were fine with the idea were Trumpists, like Kurt Schlichter and his RedState fanboy streiff. The argument put forth by such types was along the lines of including the Taliban in some kind of arrangement that gets the US entirely out of Afghanistan was the only palatable option, that the US, meaning the government and the American public, has no stomach for bringing to bear the resources for a quick, resolute victory, and that the status quo is unsustainable.
And another Trumpist, Jack Prosobiec of the One American News Network, thought it would be clever to tweet a photo of Reagan talking to mujahideen representatives in the White House in 1984. Big difference. Even if there were some jihadists among that group, they had not yet formally organized as the Taliban. And the goal then was getting the Soviets out.
Then there is the fact that, as I said in a post quoting the American Enterprise Institute's Michael Rubin the other day, the preliminary agreement US envoy Khalilzad has crafted left the official government out of the loop and really didn't require anything of the Taliban.
Then there is the level of pattern: This stunt would have been of a piece with the rank appeasement of North Korea that the Very Stable Genius has engaged in - to no avail, as well as his all-over-the-place positions on China, Russia and Iran.
So we dodged a bullet, so to speak. But going forward, it remains uncertain, as it always does, whether sober voices will have Trump's ear and whether that will not be negated by his signature last-minute impulse to change his mind.
So you and your ilk got the stomach for just what brave and righteous strategy, if only the girly government and the pussiefied public would "man-up?"
ReplyDeleteWay past time for quick and resolute victories on the 'Where empires (used to?) go to die' front. But hey, keep buffetting them defense coffers and if all the socialist bennies we hand out to our veterans don't get us first, perhaps we'll don our exceptional battle gear and get one done quickly and resolutely. You know, shock & awe, fire & fury stuff. It will be such a hoot! Meanwhile, stoking the bomb making machinary, reviving cold wars and arms races will have us going gaga at the astounding economy and elect and reelect Republicans under that winning banner of DJ Trump. Hurray! Hail to the Donald and his great American patriots! Lots of chickens have been hatched still yet to return to roost...
ReplyDeleteAs Andy McCarthy said in a piece about this at NR today, thinking of this as an Afganistan war is the wrong way to think about it. This is a war against the jihadist effort to destroy the US and the West generally. It has had and continues to have several fronts. Seen within that scope, we can see that there's no substitute for keeping enough forces in Afghanistan to keep the Taliban from taking the place back over and providing a safe haven for groups like al Qaeda and ISIS.
ReplyDeleteI'll buy that. But I want to hear about what we have to stomach for that 'quick resolute victory.' Way way way too late for that in Afghanistan. Thinking of all the multiple fronts Trump now has us entangled in. Asking for a friend.
ReplyDeleteThat's the way the Trumpists (and others inclined to isolationist-type policy, such as Rand Paul) frame the matter, that that is an option the "neocon warmongers" insist on getting an airing.
ReplyDeleteYou're a little confused here. Trump hasn't extended the span of entanglements. His inclination is to go the other direction.
"In a world spiraling towards chaos, we can begin to see the fruits of Donald Trump’s erratic, amoral and incompetent foreign policy, his systematic undermining of alliances and hollowing out of America’s diplomatic and national security architecture. Over the last two and a half years, Trump has been playing Jenga with the world order, pulling out one piece after another. For a while, things more or less held up. But now the whole structure is teetering."https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/16/opinion/hong-kong-kashmir-trump.html
ReplyDelete"Wary of starting a war before the 2020 election, Trump might make a deal with Iran, though probably a worse one than the Obama agreement that he jettisoned. The global economy could slow down but not seize up. We could get through the next 17 months with a world that still looks basically recognizable.
ReplyDeleteEven then, America will emerge with a desiccated diplomatic corps, strained alliances, and a tattered reputation. It will never again play the same leadership role internationally that it did before Trump.
And that’s the best-case scenario. The most powerful country in the world is being run by a sundowning demagogue whose oceanic ignorance is matched only by his gargantuan ego. The United States has been lucky that things have hung together as much as they have, save the odd government shutdown or white nationalist terrorist attack. But now, in foreign affairs as in the economy, the consequences of not having a functioning American administration are coming into focus. “No U.S. leadership is leaving a vacuum,” said Thornton. We’ll see what gets sucked into it."Ibid
Ahh, but I realize you're on board with a lot that Teump does, through his "grown-up" staff. Not me, bud, not me. The horror....
ReplyDeleteActually, beyond removing much of the regulatory stranglehold the government had on economic activity and basic daily life, appointing Constitutionalist judges, and having Israel's back - all of which he probably did because someone told him it would make him look like a winner to a significant portion of the voting public - I'm not on board with much at all.
ReplyDeleteHaving Israel's back is fine, tho Nettie made it look like we did not during the previous administration.when we threw a.record amount of money at him. Sincere diplomatic efforts were met with scorn and now we got the Orange Satan deceiving even the self-appointed elect (christian fundamentalists). No way has simply overturning everything he could that his predecessor(s) did (and continually trashing them all in the process) wreaked nuch of anything but anger, fear and havoc, both domestically and internationally.
ReplyDeleteEverything Obama did needed to be overturned.
ReplyDeleteOh yeah, righto. Not. If I recall correctly Obama took the oath of office shortly following a severe financial meltdown at the tail end of 8 years on Republican watch. Within 3 months the ilk that elected Orange Satan were marching in the streets essentually shouting "Hell no, we won't pay!
ReplyDeleteBarack Obama was a radical socialist with a pronounced disdain for the nation he presided over.
ReplyDeleteAhh the socialist card. Scare me.
ReplyDelete