..Washington’s neo-colonial occupation of Afghanistan, however, is confronting widespread hostility and a burgeoning armed resistance. Asked about the ability of the US to succeed where the British army in the nineteenth century and the Soviet military in the 1980s had failed, General McKiernan simply said that it was "a very unhealthy comparison". The comparison is perfectly apt. Like the British Raj and the Soviet Stalinist bureaucracy, Washington is pursuing a criminal war for the subjugation of Afghanistan and the pursuit of US economic and strategic ambitions in Central Asia. Now, thousands more US soldiers are being sent into a quagmire that shows no signs of ending.
..Military success in Afghanistan is simply not possible, for numerous logistical, historical and practical reasons. But failure will also come at a price, at least for those who will directly benefit from subduing the rebellious nation.
Former president Bush and his entourage of allies failed to turn Afghanistan into a US-styled democracy, easily exploitable for strategic and economic use. By pressing a military solution in Afghanistan, Obama is not only summoning another failed US imperial experiment as that in Iraq but insists on adding his countrys name to those of Britain and Russia, who had better chances of success, but were squarely defeated
It’s like fighting sand. No force in the world can get the better of the Afghans, Oleg Kubanov, a former Russian officer in Afghanistan told Reuters. It’s their holy land; it doesn’t matter to them if you’re Russian, American. We’re all soldiers to them.
It would be timely if Holbrooke takes a few hours from his hectic schedule in the region to brush up on Afghanistan s history, for he surely needs it.