I broadly support the measures that Ben Rhodes and Jake Sullivan are encouraging the new Democratic House to put in place in their op-ed in the New York Times. For example:
Second, Democrats should challenge the president on his approach to the “forever war.†Despite running on a pledge to withdraw from military conflicts, Mr. Trump has escalated every conflict he inherited — largely behind a cloak of secrecy and without a clear strategy. Congress can insist on greater transparency around American military deployments, forcing the administration to specify which terrorist organizations the United States is at war with and the military objectives. Democrats should also push for a plan that removes our troops from harm’s way in Afghanistan, while insisting that a war against Iran cannot take place without congressional authorization. As Mr. Trump faces political setbacks at home, Democrats must be vigilant in checking military adventurism abroad.
and
Congress can also work to end United States support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen, which has precipitated the world’s worst humanitarian catastrophe. Rather than fuel the war, we should be driving the parties toward a diplomatic solution and increasing assistance to stem the spread of famine. This is even more pressing in the aftermath of Mr. Trump’s shameful statement on Saudi Arabia last week that signaled that American foreign policy is for sale and that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman can act with impunity.
I wish those causes had a better messenger. I notice that Mr. Rhodes fails to mention from whom President Trump inherited the “forever war” in Afghanistan. Where was this zeal for peace when President Obama was escalating the war in Afghanistan, a move which has had little measurable effect other than spending billions and the deaths of American soldiers? And I seem to recall Mr. Rhodes’s zeal for President Obama’s drone war. Somehow he fails to mention that the drone war was one of the factors that contributed to Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen.
I have opposed the war in Afghanistan under three presidents, one Democrat and two Republicans. I opposed the drone war as not being a just war. I oppose U. S. support for Saudi Arabia in its war against Yemen. At least that’s consistent. When you support something when it’s done by a Democrat and oppose it when done by a Republican it sounds more like partisanship than high-minded statesmanship.
It should be noted that this op-ed is principally an advert for the PAC Rhodes and Sullivan recently formed.
It’s nice to get in kind contributions.
Reminds me, what ever happened to the peace now democrats?
Our of office politicians understand that we need to get out of Afghanistan. In office, they dont want to take the risk of leaving. I have come to the conclusion that probably the best we can hope for is minimal involvement.
“At least that’s consistent. ”
I think a lot of people thought it made sense to attack there to begin with. I think most probably now know we need to get out. I see that as recognizing that circumstances have changed, not so much a matter of inconsistency.
Steve
The Taliban were removed from power in 2001. Other than the passage of time, spending of money, and loss of lives what has changed since then?
The problems with a land invasion of Afghanistan have been the same since 2001 not the least of which is that once you have invaded you are the “occupying power” and just boogying out is a war crime.