George F. Will Wants Out Of Afghanistan

OK, I think the blog’s gone long enough having a death motif as the top post. Here’s a quickie post on foreign policy, followed by an honest-to-goodness baseball post.

First, I submit this terrific op-ed piece by none other than George F. Will, arguing for the United States’ withdrawal from Afghanistan. All the key points are here:

–Fighting a war against an enemy that’s tribal and highly regional rather than representing a united front is incredibly difficult, dangerous and expensive.

–Along these lines, the idea that Afghanistan is the “good war” was built on the premise that we needed to strike back at Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda as payback for 9/11. Except Bin Laden’s most likely long gone by now, hiding in Pakistan or some other locale. Even if he and his top lieutenants are somehow still in Afghanistan, they’re probably not going to be caught. The country’s terrain is too vast and too rugged to make any real headway.

–The United States has proven itself to be lousy at nation-building. And as Will notes, the Brookings Institute ranks only Somalia in a weaker state. Conflict still reigns in Iraq, despite hollow proclamations of victory. It would be that much tougher to try to piece together anything resembling a functioning ruling body in Afghanistan, where the country is still gripped by the opium trade and by corrupt warlords.

–Pressing on with the war in Afghanistan takes the White House’s eye off far more pressing concerns, such as the deeply flawed health care system, the woeful state of the education system, the nation’s crumbling infrastructure, the still ugly jobs market, and about 10,000 other higher priorities.

–If the U.S. is so bent on dealing with a volatile situation in that region, it should shift its eye to Pakistan. While the Taliban carries out atrocities in Afghanistan, Pakistan’s shaky government owns a nuclear arsenal, making the threat posed by organized warlords that much more dire, and more far-reaching. (Not that I’d advocate large-scale military intervention in Pakistan, but Will’s general point is valid here.)

One could easily add that the death of even one American soldier is a terrible, not-to-be-forgotten tragedy, and that this country should think long and hard before putting even one family’s son or daughter in harm’s way.

So to George Will, I offer kudos for standing up against the mindless hawks on both sides of the political aisle who spend their days dreaming up new and creative ways to bomb new and creative targets. Being a conservative and having the good sense to know when to lay down one’s arms needn’t be mutually exclusive concepts.

–

Since I never get to tell this story, and since I rarely write about George F. Will, here you go.

Nine years ago (coincidentally also on August 31 — happy anniversary, Dr. Fauchier!), I wrote a profile of Will for Investor’s Business Daily. (You’ll have to excuse the didactic nature of the article. Those “Leaders & Success” profiles were/are geared toward learning lessons from various people who’ve been successful in their fields. I’ve also written about subjects as diverse as Elizabethan poet Ben Jonson, Casey Stengel, and my favorite modern artist, Paul Klee.)

While interviewing Will for the story, I of course wanted to pursue the baseball topic, given two of his baseball books (“Men At Work” and “Bunts”) were on my shelf. We talked about his love affair with the Cubs. He then asked me who my team was. I proudly replied, “Montreal Expos!”

Now picture his reply in that George F. Will, bow tie-wearing, highly intellectual voice…

“Really?” Will said quizzically.

A long pause.

“I’ve never met…one of YOU before.”