I don't really think the impetus toward prolonged occupation and "nation-building" efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan came from DoD, vested interests or not. I recall the main agitators there being a civilian clique, actually rather small and with no significant constituency. They just happened to be on the spot post - 9/11 with an explanation and a plan, which nobody else was offering. It wasn't a very good plan, but it was superficially attractive: it was big, it could be made to sound noble, and it involved smacking around a bunch of Muslims, a significant domestic political imperative in those days. GWB bought it, and the rest is history.
I wonder if the Michael Ledeens of the world ever go back and read the tripe they published in those days...
I was one of those voices, though on a completely irrelevant scale. As you say, nobody listened. Maybe they will in the future, though I doubt it. Not that I expect the US to take on another regime change/occupation/nation building sequence any time soon, but we'll likely find some other stupid thing to do.
I quite agree that good and inclusive governance would solve Afghanistan's problems. i just don't think the US has the ability to impose or create good and inclusive governance in Afghanistan.
I still don't know why so many Americans seem so surprised and so offended that Afghans installed as a government by Americans still govern like Afghans. Who would possibly have expected that?
Bookmarks