I am from Bangladesh and I can tell you we do not and did not appreciate foreign troop presence in post war Bangladesh, and Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib made sure they were on their way as soon as feasible. I believe it was within a year.

We will of course gladly take any aid in the form of arms and money etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1971_Bangladesh_atrocities

http://www.genocidebangladesh.org/

It was the Darfur of its day.

As I said, we didn't mind foreign military assistance.

...but if the Indian troops were there long term there would have been trouble.

Yep, Indian troops withdrew by March 1972. Three months.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1964&dat=19720209&id=iKM1AAAAIBAJ&sjid=ILcFAAAAIBAJ&pg=2863,3241654

his preconceptions.

Analyzing the situation in Afghanistan without taking into consideration the nature of the Muslim zealots who rule the place and incite the populace, is an exercise in futility.

For the last more than 30 years , my people have seen nothing except death and destruction.
We have been exploited by every one , by our neighbors , by super powers and by our so called leaders ( puppets ) , whether they be Talibans or Karzaies .

I don't think its about making "West safe" or building pipeline or democracy or "liberating ou
r
women" , I think its about killing , yes you people get pleasure in killings , blood . just look
at movies and games . "Spartacus blood" your horror movies like saw etc. your games . All

these movies and games are "sick" but you people love them , because you like death and

blood , like vampires , suck the blood and resources of others and than give lecture on

human rights. What human rights , just look what you did with native Americans , native

Australians , Japan ( atomic bomb) , Iraq etc. What you did with women in the name of

witchcraft , with scientist like galileo galilei .

Just one request ........forgive us ...stop ....its enough death and blood..

Moving the topic away from Afghanistan is an excellent way to show that SPOOD has no real answer to Mr Walt's points. Most of the parallels he claims to see are of places where war is over -- and golly gee, the war isn't over in Afghanistan yet, is it?

The airy reference to east Timor is about as big an error as anybody could be expected to come up with. The east Timorese were invaded by a heavily armed force -- Indonesia's -- which in its less than a quarter of a century there bumped off about one-third of the local population. The Indonesian invasion had been with the explicit agreement of Dr Kissinger as the State Departmentr later disclosed. He asked Jakarta to hold off for a few days so Richard Nixon and he himself wouldn't be embarrassed by an unprovoked attack on east Timor while the Washington all stars were visiting Jakarta.

It's true the east Timorese were happy to see non-Indon soldiers arrive and stay there for a few years. One reason was that Indon-sponsored criminal gangs continued to walk across the land border between free east Timor and Indonesian west Timor, and slice up the locals with abandon. At least one of these attacks was captured by a western news camera. Another such camera caught east Timorese mothers -- they are a short race -- throwing their babies over the razor wire surrounding the UN compound in Dili, to save them from those Indon marauders.

I see no parallel with Afghanistan in this.

They were ordered to attack and inavde a country on false pretenses.

MOSYARKONI

>> spent blood and treasure to build schools, government offices

Maybe they should think twice about bombing those buildings so they wouldn't have to rebuild them?

>> train and equip your national army

To do what? Act as the hired thugs of the US puppet dictator that is then put in charge?

>> Maybe then you would also think US forces deserve more than having two Field Grade officers being shot in the back of the head over Korans ALREADY desecrated by prisoners.

Yes, they deserve not to be sent to Afghanistan to fight an unecessary warin the first place.

Moving the topic away from Afghanistan is an excellent way to show that SPOOD has no real answer to Mr Walt's points.

Actually its way to show that Walt's points are just based on nothing more than generalization and an agenda. There are plenty of instances occupying forces were well received by the populance. As occupiers go, and Afghanistan has seen a lot of them, we are not exactly "the evil empire". The US is one of the only countries which tends leaves a place better than we found it

Walt fails to note the orchestrated nature of the reactions in Afghanistan. This was not a spontaneous protest movement. It was deliberate provocation. But he has an agenda which he wears on his sleeve and will look for any excuse to push it.

9/11 was an isreali false flag to pave for the US to place puppet regimes in the middle east

Prior to the US war against Afghanistan, the Taliban responded to Bush's demand for bin Laden and associates by saying they were willing to negotiate prosecution and trial, but that they needed to be provided evidence of bin Laden's involvement. Bush refused to do so.

Secondly, it is far from clear bin Laden was a key player behind 9/11. There is much evidence 9/11 was an inside job, and little evidence it was not.

Third, anyone the least bit competent with military or police tactics and strategy knows that capture of bin Laden and cohorts was a very low priority. USA did not contain and then collar the suspects, they primarily bombed elsewhere and made little or no attempt to close off escape for months after the bombing began.

Fourth, USA's war continued long after bin Laden and associates were neutralized in Afghanistan.

I've seen many videos, where a "martyr" claimed he loved death. Your mention of Japan--if I recall correctly, and I think I do--Japan in fact attacked the US.

And I'm sure, the six women killed for witchcraft in the 1600s was a travesty, yet, I'd be willing to wager, the Taliban probably averages that in a week, for similarly ridiculous instances--like not wanting to be raped. Wanting to go to school. Showing her hair. Walking to her neighbors without an escort etc.

To lump all western atrocities together over many centuries, probably isn't a good comparison. There exist today in your region, indiscriminate suicide bombings against members of a different sect at their places of worship.

After all, let's not forget why the US is in Afghanistan. They harbored, and continue to harbor scum who wish to do us harm. Remember those Twin Towers? They didn't fall down by themselves.

Why is it that your kind likes to behead people by the way?

America and so must India understand that it is the 'Islamic Way' to invite a foreign power when they start loosing 'Isalmic Grip' on their people or other people. In 1700 A.D. the Islamic Empire in India colllapsed but they did not yet finish their job of converting whole India into 'Islamic Only India'. They partially finished the job of 'Islamic Only Pakistan' in 1947 through th British. Once America finishes its job of wasting trillions of dollars in the ‘Islamic Only Pakistan-Afghanistn, the Islam will restart its business of, the unfinished job of 1947, converting the rest of India, into. the ‘Islamic Only India’. One must remember Afghanistan never could become a nation as Islamic Armies from Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Uzbekistan, etc., etc., used to assemble there, since 100 A.D., and attacked India, for centuries, to transform India into 'Islamic Only India'. In 1947 they claimed 1/3rd (E-W) of India as 'Islamic Only Pakistan'. So Pakistan is Afghanistan and Afghanistan is Pakistan. This is a catch 22 situation which one will you catch first. Iran the ‘Islamic Only Nation’ like Pakistan ‘ becoming, nuclear power, should, be, of little, concern, to the ‘Western Nations’, as Pakistan, already, is, a nuclear power. An Islamic(nuclear later) Power. Pakistan, was created, by the British, by carving out, 1/3rd(Punjab, Sindh and Bengal) of India, in 1947. It was created, as an ‘Islamic Only(later nuclear as well) Nation-the Pakistan’. This was with the approval of, the UNO, the stamping, authority. The UNO was used for creating a new nation the-‘Islamic Only-the Pakistan’, in 1947, yet, the UNO, is committed, to, no discrimination, among the people(millions massacred and million became refuges in India in 1947) on religious grounds. This ‘religious ritual’, was later, followed, by the Iran, and, declared itself, as the ‘Islamic Only Nation’, not very, long ago. Now, Iran, is trying, to be ‘(double) Islamic-Nuclear(trouble), as well. Should it be of any concern to the rest of the world?. Pakistan already is(double-trouble), and, was, approved, by, America, Britain, France, China, and the Russia( the security council). This expansion of the double ‘Nuclear-Islamic’ terror, from Pakistan to Iran, has now become, a worry, for the ‘Western Nations’. One should not forget that the ‘Western Armies’ are now assembled in ‘Afghanistan’ where the ‘Islamic Armies’ from Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Mongolia(Genghis Khans-Chinese), Uzbekistan, etc. etc, once assembled(1000-1700 A.D.) and invaded India, over centuries, to, transform, India, into, Islamic Only Nation’. The Islam crumbled, in India, in 1700 A.D., and invited, the British, to finish the rest of the job. They did finish the job, in 1947, with a reward, to the Islam, the ‘Islamic Only -Pakistan’. The Western Armies are fighting war, on terror(Islam), by, assembling, in Afghanistan (Iraq, before, what for?). They are assembled, now, in Afghanistan, far away, from their homes, to safeguard, against, 9/11, that, it dose not happen again, in their own home. It, happened, in India, all right, but it was. 26/11. Is there any difference between the two? Is, India, a double, Islamic-Nuclear, trouble? Is the West using the Islam or the Islam using the West and what for? The Afghanistan, is the base, of terror. Do you have to make way for the Islam, ’or else’leave the earth? But ‘where to’, may be, to the Mars, as refugees, if, lucky enough. Indians are busy as usual in their own in-fights(the 14 to 28 ‘Personal-States’- more will follow), even, today. They have no time to worry about the ‘Islamic-Chinese’ terror of expansionism in the ‘Himalayas’, which are, ‘The Indian Lands’ like the PSB(Punjab, Sindh and Bengal). Read all about it in the Book: “India Divided Religion ‘Then’ 1947(East-West) ‘Now’ What Languages(North-South)? ISBN:9781462639755)” by ‘Mohin Jadarro Harappa’/PublishAmerica, and buy at, http://www.publishamerica.net/

. …

The mighty nations on earth USA, China, UK, Russia, France, etc., etc. must realize that Islam, has been, colonizing, earth, as, the ‘Islamic Only Lands’ for the ‘Islamic Only People’ for centuries. All the Islamic Nations, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Syria, Egypt, Nigeria, Sudan, Yemen, etc., etc., are basically for the Islamic people only. Not much population of other faiths or religions live in these nations, and, even if they do, they are under, constant, persecution, by, the Islamic people. Some of these ‘Islamic Only Nations’ (Iran, Pakistan, etc.) have been created, since the establishment, of, the, UNO, whose function, is, to create harmony among people of different, faiths, religions, color, creed , caste, etc., etc. This is not what has been happening since the second world war, thought, to avoid, further wars. War on terror is also a war. It is taking away world resources, and, peace, on earth. The creation of ‘Islamic Only Pakistan’(from the Punjab, Sindh, Bengal, lands of India, in 1947) at the cost of, the millions massacred, and, the millions becoming refugees, in India, is only, a recent, incidence, of, the 1947. The, Islam, in, Syria, Egypt, Iran, etc., etc., now crushing, its own people, is a testimony to the effect, of, the ‘Islamic Only Control’ of the ‘Islamic Only Lands’, once they have colonized them, over, centuries, India is a typical example which exemplifies the real intentions of Islam, after India, is left over, with 2/3rd of India(N-S), with terrorist attacks, so, common still, in India. So the intentions are very clear ‘Islam’, and, nobody else, including the Islamic, dissentions, on, this, earth. What is happening in Afghanistan now is nothing more than the accumulated effect of the centuries of Islamic Armies(from Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Uzbekistan, …etc., etc., gathering there and invading India. The efforts are still on to colonize whole of the Kashmir as the ‘Islamic Only Kashmir’. The days of the rest of India also ending up as the ‘Islamic Only India’ are not very far. The efforts are already there to create anarchy, fear, and, intimidation, by terrorist, attacks. China has played its dual role of terror, by, occupation, of. ‘Tibet’. by force. in 1954. and, is, in partnership with Pakistan, in, the occupation of vast areas, of, Himalayas(e.g. Kashmir, Mount Kailash, Nepal, etc., etc., ) which have nothing to do with China. If America could understand all this there is no need for them to waste their financial and military resources in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Once the Western Armies will be out of Afghanistan the ‘Islamic Only Nations’ will still be only Islamic and nobody else. They invite Western Nations(Britain invited in 1700 A.D. in India by Islam) to do their dirty job of controlling their people( Islamic or otherwise) and once the job is over they are still where they started ‘The Islamic Only Nations’. Is that what for the World is wasting its resources, e.g., from ‘Islam-Abad’, to, ‘Islam-Indi-Abad’ There is no oil in Afghanistan or Pakistan. But it does not take an Einstein to understand that Afghanistan and Pakistan are the ‘Islamic Only Nations’ as are the oil nations of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, etc., etc. I wonder how can I make it clearer than this. I have said in English language which is well understood world wide. Saying in Tamil language will only hide the facts. Indians are busy as usual in their own in-fights(14 to the 28 ‘Personal-States’, since 1947, more, will come, soon), even, today. They have no time to worry about the ‘Islamic-Chinese’ terror of expansionism in the ‘Himalayas’, which are, ‘The Indian Lands’ like the PSB(Punjab, Sindh and Bengal). Read all about it in the Book: “India Divided Religion ‘Then’ 1947(East-West) ‘Now’ What Languages(North-South)? ISBN:9781462639755)” by ‘Mohin Jadarro Harappa’/PublishAmerica, and buy at, http://www.publishamerica.net/

Ron Paul is an isolationist with an inherently toxic view of foreign and domestic relations. The man is the hero of those who don't like to think very hard.

"People like SPOOD really think we (Americans) are able to help other countries when there is no national interest for us (US) to be there. "

We are about the only country which does. Afghanistan is a shithole that nobody wants to be in charge of. The only excuse to be there is altruism! If we could walk away from the country without worry it will descend into another haven for international terror, we would do so with all deliberate haste. [I plead no comment on Iraq]

Plenty of interventions occurred for humanitarian reasons. You didn't get my prior references. This is what I get for assuming someone may be familiar with modern global events. Here is a further explanation of my prior examples:
1.The UN forces (Australian and Ghurkas mostly) ousting Indonesian troops in East Timor
2. Outside forces ousting the genocidal Rwandan leaders
3. Vietnam invading Cambodia to oust genocidal Pol Pot
4. India driving out mass murdering Pakistani forces from Bangledesh
5. What were our interests in the No-Fly zones of post Gulf War Iraq?

"Question of the SPOOD's of the world – how would you feel if the US government took up the business of; building roads and highways, schools, municipal buildings bridges, infrastructures, electrical grids, water plants, etc.. etc.. ?"

We did it before in the 30's. It was called the Works Progress Administration. Also the Interstate Highway Act.

Given the sorry state of our infrastructure I would welcome it!

Any other questions?

"he is a non-interventionist, a follower of George Washington."

Which makes Paul one of the finest foreign policy minds of the 18th Century.

Most of his domestic policies seem to derive from ideas which haven't survived 1789 or ignore events after 1865.

Read the Grand Chessboard by ZB, we are not there to help anybody.

I like ZB but he really opened a box in Afghanistan. ZB deserves as much credit for bringing down the Soviets as Ronnie. There should be some trepidation before we cheer such Machiavellian machinations. Though, to be fair, I don't think he would've advised turning such a blind eye to them either.

um so its ok to say anti christian anti muslim things but you criticize a khazar and your a nazi? nice try

I certainly agree with those who find Ron Paul distasteful, and likely for many of the same reasons. However, mainstream Republicans (and most Democrats) are far worse, with their many wars against foreign nations, their national economy, and against fellow USAns. (The war on drugs is an example of the latter.)

Ron Paul may be little or no good, but he is not that bad either. Too many, both Repubs and Dems, are little or no good, and very, very, bad. These wars are very, very bad. Not as bad as Hitler's war, but on the good side, Hitler pulled off an economic miracle far greater than that of FDR or anyone else.

literally makes no sense. Rather than offer up some ridiculous pablum, perhaps you should offer up a specific example of what you mean.

Let me put it to you in terms you might understand. As far as the Afghans are concerned, it's "Red Dawn" and we're the Russians to them (if the Russians hadn't already been the Russians!)

You don't need a military to send in NGOs, or spend billions of dollars of good, or decrease infant mortality rates, increase literacy and education levels.

Remember that you morons bombed the place for months and reduced it to rubble. You don't get credit for cleaning up your own mess.

would have suggested going in to Afghanistan after 9/11, and rather than sending in forces sent in civil engineers. (I for some reason have "Otho" from Beetlejuice in mind "cyrillian blue") If we had earnestly gone in and spent 1/10th of what we've spent on real infrastructure, they'd be farther ahead, and likely would've turned Bin Laden over to us themselves. I know that's so antithetical to most people's sensibilities, but doubtless would have been more effective, and yielded far greater returns..

The opening chapter of Tom Clancy's the Cardinal of the Kremlin describes the creation of the Archer, a man supplied with Stinger missiles by the CIA, with a dedicated mission to kill foreign invaders. The Soviets recruited the Archer as an enemy by killing some of his family, and kidnapping at least one child to be re-educated into their cause.

USA has taken over the Soviet role. Children are dying all over in Afghanistan because of USAs invasion. The invaders, and their quislings, are so bad even the Taliban are preferable to many.

Is a baby killer a fanatic? Or, worse?

Are indeed out of hand. What fanaticism. "We don't need no stinking land titles, the Bible is our title."

Only one type of fanaticism. We don't see Jewish settlers abuse their Palestinian chattel. But, we sure see these crazy Muslims get all worked up over a "book." Ignore that we've sewn such chaos throughout Muslim lands. Ignore our subversion of democracy, rule of law, our ideals and founding principles. We no longer live up to our ideals, so we talk of American exceptionalism--hypocrisy by more palatable name.

Well, I'm willing to concede that people in occupied countries are likely to be unhappy
about it, and I'm willing to concede that or presence and behavior there are making us
enemies as well as friends{2}. I'm even will to accept, at least provisionally, that our
continued presence isn't improving matters much, and is costing both us and them far more than it's worth. But. I think it's a mistake think that their reaction to the burnings are *because* of these things. All available evidence is that they{1} would react with riot, mayhem, and murder to the slight regardless of external circumstances. After all, when the US isn't there as a focus for their violent proclivities, they seem perfectly happy to launch attacks on people of slightly variant religious identity, on neighboring countries, on their own women, and on hundred foot statues. The problem isn't that they're upset, or that they have peculiar religious ideas, or that they're trying to defend their culture. The problem is that they think being upset is a good reason to blow things up and kill people, and they don't seem to be very particular about who it is that they kill.

{1} of course, thinking of all of Afghanistan or Pakistan as one monolithic "they" is about
as moronic an error of thought as one could make; Reasons for people who decided to demonstrate probably included people who hate Americans and were looking for an excuse, people who love the koran and were genuinely incensed, people who's girlfriend was sleeping with their gym teacher, people who were drunk off their ass and looking for
excitement, people who are paid by other foreign powers to make life as difficult and expensive for the US as possible, and people who were looking for a chance to break into a nearby store and steal something... It's not like the civilized world, where people riot about important things like: Their soccer team won. Or lost. Either one.

{2} Friends, because if you happen to be a member of one of the politically weak
or oppressed groups, and you manage to get yourself or too many of your friends
killed, the occupation is probably the best thing that ever happened to you. And if you're a quisling, you can look forward to dying shortly after the troops leave, unless the government left behind is robust enough to survive, which is what the troops are SUPPOSED to be trying to arrange, although it looks kind of unlikely, to me.

The Soviet occupation was in the 80s, with the invasion in 1979. The primary difference in the occupations is that there is no major power backing the Resistance.

The Quran should be burned to dispose of it. However, the Quran should never be disrespected, handled while unclean, left in unclean areas. So, simply throwing them in an incinerator would likely violate a few aspects of that. Where as reflectively burning one in your fireplace, or even campfire might not.

I failed to make the comments about the silk road. I don't know how much people really take notice of such things, but these old roads/routes exist for good reason. Generally these roads use the lowest passes and often represent the easiest way into remote lands. I've spent lots of time in the mountains hiking and climbing and exploring these extreme environments. The silk road is likely far more vital than an old relic. It no doubt connects towns and cities and nations along the easiest inland route. This would be very important to anyone seeking to build roads, pipelines or any other infrastructure through the region.

Muslims would not agree with you there. According to them you can't burn a Koran or desecrate it in any way. This highlights the cultural insensitivity many Americans hold towards a lot of foreigners. And the men who burnt those Koran's are guilty of complete stupidity. How did they not know that there would be a violent reaction against such an act? Do they not remember the fundamentalist American pastor who burnt some Korans a year or two ago, which provoked a lot of violence and resulted in a number of deaths?

Real racist, Do you really want to bring up the question of the heritage of speakers? It may be fair, but to be fair we should disclose every AngloSaxon, Irish (they're different), Southern Euro, Northern, Mexican, Cuban, Jew, Jap, Chinese, Tiawanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Indian, Pakistani, North African, East African, West African, Russian, Ukranian, German, Greek, Lebanese (and what faith of Lebanese)... Let's expose it all. Perhaps we should bar people of an involved heritage from reporting. Let no Cuban report on Cuba. No Anglo, no Irish, no European on Issues there. No Arab, no Jew on Israel/Palestine.

Somehow I don't think you'd support that. I think you're invoking selective use of these categories. There's a reason to expect a bias on current events and history among the groups I listed. I DO think it's important to get a wide array of views. But, in America, I don't think the voices Walt intends to join enjoy anything close to the same exposure as Israel-aligned voices have. But, the slurs you hurl at those voices says something about your intention to deny some as legitimate airing of their arguments. Don't make the logical fallacy of ad-hominem attacks--address the arguments, don't attack the people. When you resort to logical fallacies, bad reasoning most people come to resent it. (Could Jewish paranoia be a self fulfilling prophecy? again, it's justifiable.) But, I ask you to please abstain from fallacies, make a logically sound argument. We can dispute the facts, but when your reasoning is fallacious, we're left with nothing; just slur and resentment.

the so called ONE state solution is a sham, a fairy tale, an impossibilty, and moreover, a veiled attempt to destroy israel. Its kind of like the right of return ...it SOUNDS fair, but what it really is , is a) predicated on a lie, and b) an attempt to destroy israel by means other than militarily.

you're gonna have to do better little scottie.....it sux for you that you are fillled with such hate for the jews...yes, the jews scottie...we all know its not "israel" you have issue with, its the jews. but hey, that's your problem to deal with, not mine. I just wonder how you in dallas feel about blacks, latinos, mexicans, etc..etc...

buh bye scott the racist.

I grew up with the vestiges of Jim Crow. I'm actually quite sensitive to it. We had white only water fountains, you have Jew only roads in Israel. Sorry fantasist, both Sharon and Barak have described Israel's existential dilemma, Israel can be a democracy, or a Jewish theocracy--it can't be both. No anti-Semite created this conundrum; rather it was Israel's fetishization of Arab land. Israel was initially offered 51% of the disputed land. By the time the unprovoked land grab of 67 occurred, Israel had stolen enough land to possess 77% of the land. And, Israel can't kick the land theft habit. They're so addicted, they can't leave that 22% alone. Israel is a country without borders. That is your existential flaw. You have only yourselves to blame.

By the way, I don't hate all Jews. In fact, I rely on many fairminded Jews for many of the facts I have on this issue. Glenn Greenwald, Jim Lobe, Uri Averny among others. It's funny that there are really no Arabs saying that Palestinians are unreasonable to oppose these land grabs. In fact, there are MANY Palestinian Christians who are just as opposed to the abuses of Israel as the Palestinian Muslims. They differ as to whether it's appropriate to fight back, but they don't have any daylight on the "oppression, domination, humiliation and starvation of an entire people"--to quote thousands of IDF soldiers.

I respectfully disagree with this, BING.

In the first place it's my understanding that tons and tons of "society-building" money was poured into Afghanistan right alongside our troops and the money spent on the military occupation and going to recruit Afghans to help us with that military component.

But more importantly don't you think there was just a such a huge difference between Afghanistan and Japan as to amount to not just a matter of degree, but a matter of totally different *nature*?

In Japan we weren't struggling with another force opposing us for the hearts and minds of the populace, which in Afghanistan is a native force, with the ability to melt back into the population, or take refuge right across a handy border.

And Japanese society had been pretty much totally melted by the time we moved in, with probably damn few fighting-age males even left there to oppose us.

And then you just simply have the incalculable differences in cultures, and all the differences that means.

In short, isn't the implication of what you write nothing less than what we're already starting to hear from the neo-cons and etc. to the effect that ... "See, if only we had done this or that in Afghanistan a *little* differently then Aha, the population would have loved us"?

Sounds to me that way, and I just think that's bosh.

Maybe—maybe—if before starting to build some modern society in Afghanistan we had first gone in and pretty totally destroyed what existed before, and in the process pretty totally decimated the generations of fighting-capable males, and *then* started building, and then continued same for a long long time while maintaining an absolute no-nonsense martial law regime, and somehow kept out infiltrating fighters from across its borders, then something like that whole shebang might succeed.

But only then, I think. Only after essentially wiping the previous society and culture and its structures "clean" (from our point of view) could that succeed, essentially because this would leave no other opportunity for anything else to happen.

Anything short of that though, no, I think you're wrong if you're suggesting we just did things wrong there. It was a fools' errand right from the start.

Like someone else here said, the only reason we had for going in in the first place was to get bin Laden and to decimate al Queda; having done that we should have bugged out immediately, perhaps only leaving behind a note saying good luck, but noting that if the country once again was going to start hosting terrorists to be used against us that we'd be back.

when the Taliban didn't attack the US?

In fact, the war against the Taliban just serves to demonstrate how aimless the US occupation has been - especially now that the US is negotiating with the Taliban.

What a waste!

They had multiple chances to turn over OBL. Even the Saudis asked for them to do so and they refused. They also had Al Queda training camps in their country.

When we go to occupy a country to endeavor regime change or nation building, it is important to have a clear objective, a well-thought plan and a group of competent professionals for plan implementation. I believe we lack all three. We had a good start, greeted by Afghans savaged by Taliban regime and aspiring to work with us. We have not got the job. If you gauge success by what we set out to do and what we have accomplished. If you blame your failure largely on external factors, you will always have ample excuses to cover your own incompetency and failure. In Afghanistan we have not only a failure but a spectacular failure. Blaming Afghans is to refusing our responsibilities.

WW II Japanese were ultra-nationalistic and under constant military indoctrination. Four million soldiers returning home from China were disenfranchised and bitter. They could easily turn against US occupation, but they did not because we made it work for them. McArthur and his staff worked with any and every Japanese who were willing to help rebuild Japan. Many staunch and adamant supporters and collaborators of Imperialist Japanese were given major responsibilities of reconstruction. McArthur limited the scope of retribution and of court martial and deflected the vengeful pressure from Washington DC politicians.

We were keen on De-Ba'athification in Iraq and hunting down bin Ladin and his cohorts. We wanted to get even. People in the States wanted to hear how many bad guys we have killed, not how reconstruction has progressed. Yes our public statements said one thing but the sentiment underneath was unmistakenly vengeful. We wanted to kill ‘em all. Gitmo is still there. We still want to kill more

@BING520:

Well don't know how anyone could put the argument better than you have here in the space provided, but I still respectfully disagree: In any reasonable time-frame (less, say, than 25 years even), it just wouldn't have worked, thinks I.

(And this isn't to "blame" the Afghans at all; not making such normative judgments here. Indeed if I was an Afghani I don't know that I'd be welcoming our occupation either. On the other hand though I do disagree that we have any "responsibility" there as you somewhat say, but that's another argument.)

Thank you, Sin Nombre. It has been my pleasure. I am glad to know there is someone like you who would take the time and think and write thoughtfully.