Parent thread. It's an interesting idea.
I mean, I *like* this idea. I'd like it to work. It's so brilliant, so unexpected, so great...but there's a bit of a seven-letter hole.
Ever hear of a place called Somalia?
We went to Somalia on a humanitarian peace-keeping mission. The results of that were American servicemen unexpectedly coming home in body bags. We now know today that Somalia was one of the first battlefields of a guy named Osama Bin Laden, and he won convincingly.
Now, imagine attempting to do it on his turf.
And Shrubya even said something relevant to the whole thing in his speech tonight: "The United States respects the people of Afghanistan -- after all, we are currently its largest source of humanitarian aid -- but we condemn the Taliban regime."
Where is that humanitarian aid going? If we pump more into the country, how do we make sure the Afghan people get the aid without the Taliban getting it?
More importantly, who gets the job of distributing it? Anybody who is American going in there risks their life to pull this off, and if we send the army in to do it...well, isn't that setting us up for Somalia all over again?
You said it yourself. The Afghan people fear us. Unfortunately, the number one response to fear is to fight.
I'm not thrilled about the idea of a military battle either. I'm searching for a middle ground myself. But if we go militarily into Afghanistan, I can deal with that, if we write a new Marshall Plan for the twenty first century and lift Afghanistan back to its feet.
As I said, sometimes it sucks to be a historian. :P