Synopsis of Positions on Afghanistan - One last post

I suspect that we are getting to a point on this topic where we are talking past each other to some extent. However, I would like to make one more stab at my position. Let me just state at the outset that the handling of the war in Afghanistan is relatively low on my list of policy decisions of which I am critical of the Bush administration. As we have outlined, I agree with them for going in and I agree that post-war planning was bound to be a very difficult task. You are right that I don't have very good "proof" of negligence or poor planning. However, I was careful to be explicit that I want to judge this administration (as I want to judge all administrations) based on outcomes and accomplisments. My only real point here is that if you grade the Bush Administration on their ability to achieve objectives in Afghanistan (the ones I teed up) nearly five years after the beginning of their policy, they are doing very poorly. That is the soure of my criticism. I would certainly be willing to debate whether the objectives I proposed were reasonable or whether the jury is still out on whether or not they are or will be achieved. For the record, I am willing to state here and now that if the Bush administration brings in Bin Ladin (any part of him, I might add), I will consider it a very important (and long overdue) achievement.

As to your second point, I fully agree that spreading democracy and freedom is the best long term solution to eliminating terrorist states which will threaten our safety -- but that is only if it is reasonable to predict that freedom and democracy can be achieved in this region of the world. As you so rightly state in your response to my (specious) argument about eradicating poverty in the US, some things are simply not reasonable to predict -- they are just pie-in-the-sky ideas with no basis in reality. I am just suggesting that we should consider the view that it was unreasonable to predict that we could bring freedom and democracy to certain regions of the middle east. I am not saying that is a foregone conclusion. But I do believe it is a reasonable position (that it was never going to happen) and any war planning that went on should have addressed that scenario. My gut tells me that the Bush administration did not address that scenario.

I hope I am not beating a dead horse, but I feel that this is an important viewpoint that does not often get addressed in these types of arguments and I want to give it my very best shot. Very curious to hear your reactions.