AZhitman wrote:I kinda see it this way:
If we're not willing to eradicate an entire city or two, or effectively cripple an entire country's infrastructure, then we're really not at "war", and we need to question our role going forward.
The problem is that the Soviets already fought a war there like that, and it produced Afghanistan the way it is now, and now it's everyone's problem.
Every unstable nation will continue to be a thorn in the side of the developed world until it becomes stable and developed itself, no shortcuts. This means that the problem in Afghanistan won't go away until someone cleans it up. You can't wipe it off the map, you're never going to scare people with nothing to lose into being docile.
You have to make the alternative to Jihad be economic participation, new cars and flat screen TV's, because that's all anyone really wants. When people can't have that stuff, they go do silly things like grow poppies and shoot RPG's at helicopters. I'm not saying you can hand the Taliban keys to BMW's and have them chill out, but over a long period of time that's the gist.
Now, I've got NO idea how to make that work, certainly no more than anyone else. It's going to take decades and be difficult and expensive, and it doesn't HAVE to be us that does it, but my argument is that there is no alternative and SOMEONE has to do it, or they will keep growing poppies and blowing up buildings until the end of time.