verum planto vos solvo

After 10 years, its time to leave Afghanistan to the Afghans.



Ten years is a long time to pursue a war. A long time to nation build. A long time to commit America's military and finantial assets. To put things into perspective - the United States fought in a World War, won that war, established Democracy in those countries, then rebuilt the former enemies fallen infrastructure in about the same amount of time.


The reason for our military action in Afghanistan was real and yes, necessary. Afghanistan was the home base of Al Quada - the group responsible for attacking America on its own soil on September 11th. They and their assets needed to be neutralized and a safe haven for their activities denied. The Taliban held a brutal hold upon that country. Women were executed for acts as simple as showing too much skin. Some were shot because they dared to teach their female children to read. Others were beheaded because they were raped and apparently, in some bizarre and twisted way, brought dishonor to their families. Once the U.S. led invasion of Afghanistan was successful, these brutal acts ended. Children both boys and girls attended newly built schools. Hospitals reopened. And at a very high cost both in blood and national treasure - security was established. But now a decade has elapsed. It is not unreasonable to think that the Afghan army should be able to provide for their own country's security. But is our commitment greater than the people we liberated? If so, and sadly I believe this to be the case - it is time to depart - at least the major cities, such as they are.


The problem is that Afghanistan is less of a country than it appears. A population that is largely uneducated and tribal, there is no unifying tie that binds them. They have little historical experience in a strong national government. It is an alien concept to them. They are poor - eeking out an existence in a hostile environment both politically, culturally and environmentally. They appear to have no appetite for the hard slog necessary to liberate themselves and establish a nation. To be fair, there have been many Afghans ready to make that sacrifice. But are there enough? And why, after 10 years are there not more of them? Perhaps they are better suited to the existence they know than the one they could have. And perhaps it is time for us to realize that.


I would not abandon the country and our military assets entirely. We should establish and maintain one or two bases outside the major cities, away from populated areas where we could react to AlQuaeda incursions and Taliban military activities. Drones could be used more often to reduce the risk to U.S. military personnel. There is no need for us to risk American lives patrolling Afghan cities and towns. Let Afghan security forces take on the brunt of maintaining security and doing the heavy lifting. After all, it is their country.


In every measurable way, we have been successful in this Afghan war. The enemy has been routed. Defeated. He holds no ground except that which he uses to cross and escape into neighboring Pakistan. An elected government, though corrupt, has been established. A national army trained. Now it is time for us to exit stage left and go home. Whether Afghanistan remains free or not is largely out of our hands. We cannot force the love of democracy upon a people. It is their to embrace - understand the sacrifices necessary or allow themselves to revert to oppression. The choice and the hard work is theirs.

No voter ID? Then vote early and vote often.

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has just passed a law that requires a photo ID when casting your vote. I can hear the cries of "racism" already. I never thought of ID being necessary to vote as a racism issue, any more than requiring a drivers license to legally drive a car, a racist issue. Or for that matter, providing ID when you buy liquor, rent a car, cash a check or board a plane. In actuality, the list of things that require a photo ID is quite lengthy. So why does a required ID to vote cause such an uproar? Aren't we all interested in an accurate and fair representative vote? Well, you'd think so wouldn't you, but... uh, uh. Democrats fight tooth and nail against any efforts to require a photo ID when voting. Gee. Its almost as if they want to encourage illegal and fraudulent voting. (sarcastic smirk) They know that most Americans think its a good idea to prove you are who you say you are when voting - and to vote just once, not multiple times. Since that's an argument doomed to fail, they have to address the issue in another manner. They need a boogieman. A diversion. VIOLA! When all else fails and logic takes a nap - enter "racism".

The story goes something like this;

Requiring poor, inner city people (re: Blacks) to provide ID is an insult and hearkens to the era of the poll tax. It creates fear and resentment. Plus these people probably don't have any ID because after all, they've been kept down by "The Man" so long. (It has nothing to do with the fact that this constituancy reliably votes Democratic 96% of the time) (2nd sarcastic smirk) Plus many old people don't drive, so they don't have drivers licenses. What kind of ID could they possibly have? So in addition to racism we have ageism.

Enter the facts.

First of all. I think it would be difficult to find anyone without a photo ID. My parents are 87 and 83. Both gave up their drivers licenses a few years ago. Yet, they have the FREE photo ID's issued by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. If you accept government assistance, you also have a photo ID. So the old and the poor are covered. In the event you don't have a photo ID, the state will allow you to cast a provisional ballot that could be included once ID is obtained, should a vote be close. So far, I'm not seeing the racist part - just the "stuff the ballot with bogus votes" part.

I'd have more respect for this farce if the Dems just came out and said; "Hey, we like stuffing ballots like in the old days. Its a Chicago tradition!" But instead they resort to the flimsiest of arguments that have no basis in reality. I imagine that lawyers for the opposition are preparing their legal briefs as we speak. Ready to bring the case before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and eventually, the U.S. Supreme Court. And what will be their main argument? Well, the poor are to stupid to get an ID card and the old are too feeble. And in the upside down world we find ourselves in - sadly, that argument just may work.