We Can’t Afford a “No Matter the Cost” Approach to Afghanistan

-

A quick follow up to my last post on Afghanistan.
Frederick Kagan penned an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times in October 2007 called “Spend Whatever It Takes to Win the War on Terror.”
Unless his views have changed over the past year and a half, Kagan seems to think that the “war on terror” – defined as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan – must be “won” no matter the cost.
This kind of Bush-era strategic laziness has got to go. Containing international terrorism needs to be recast as a high priority among several in our national security strategy, rather than George W. Bush’s “defining ideological struggle of the 21st century” or Senator McCain’s phrase, “transcendent challenge.”
Those of us who question whether throwing more troops, money, and political capital into Afghanistan makes sense need to point out the opportunity costs of an escalation and we need to challenge folks like Frederick Kagan and others to explain how much their plan will cost and why it is worth spending our limited resources in Afghanistan instead of addressing our other interests at home and around the globe.
— Ben Katcher

Comments

3 comments on “We Can’t Afford a “No Matter the Cost” Approach to Afghanistan

  1. Andy says:

    wouldn’t call this stategic “laziness”, it needs a much more accurate, detailed term.

    Reply

  2. liz says:

    Aren’t Frederick Kagan, his brother, Robert, and their father, Donald, all signers of the PNAC manifesto, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” back in 2000? And such a coincidence, isn’t it, all this PNAC master “planning” came about conveniently before 9/11.
    Do the Kagans or any of their immediate family members own stock or consult for any defense contractors? I’m just asking!
    I wouldn’t call this stategic “laziness”, it needs a much more accurate, detailed term.
    imo, anyone calling for a foreign policy that calls for an Afghan war from now until eternity is working extra hard to bankrupt this nation faster than AIG, Paulsen, Rubin, etc.
    I’m not asking any Kagan what their war would cost in money, lives and political capital. If they like the PNAC scriblings, it probably was already thought out in great details years ago.

    Reply

  3. ... says:

    are the chinese okay with the usa spending its borrowed money into tinpot status? probably… move over usa, here comes china…

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *