I am in agreement with Republican Senator Lindsey Graham on the need for the United States to have a permanent presence in Afghanistan. I believe that the administration along with the Republicans must jointly articulate a reason based on truth as opposed to the silly reasons that have been given over the years.
Yes the Taliban in a threat but nothing near one requiring the investment in lives and resources that the United States have been investing in Afghanistan. The Taliban in its current form is solely a destabilizing pain to parts of Pakistan and Afghanistan but not a direct threat to the United States,
What is true is that Afghanistan has a lot of natural resources that the new economy will be heavily dependent on. These resources are resources the Afghanistan people are currently unable to utilize given their level of education and development. As such the absence of the United States in the region leaves a corrupt few Afghans to negotiate said resources to our competitors.
National pride, national security, and national survival going forward dictates that inasmuch as we have been wrong in many of the reasons for the actions we have taken over there, that we first lookout for American interest. The President must articulate a plausible message of us keeping an appropriate presence that not only reverberates with the Afghans but with the United States Citizens as well as Citizens around the world.
My Book: As I See It: Class Warfare The Only Resort To Right Wing Doom
Book’s Webpage: http://amzn.to/dt72c7 – Twitter: http://twitter.com/egbertowillies
Lindsey Graham: Permanent U.S. Presence In Afghanistan Would Be ‘Enormously Beneficial’
Sam Stein stein@huffingtonpost.com | HuffPost Reporting
NEW HAVEN — There was, with really no notable exception, an absence of discussion of the Afghanistan war during the course of the 2010 campaign. But that may have been more a product of the electoral landscape (congressional races often don’t lend themselves to foreign policy debates) and strategic timelines (the start date for withdrawal begins in July 2011) than anything else.
And, indeed, during an interview Sunday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) provided some indication that Republicans would push U.S. permanency in Afghanistan in the years ahead, insisting that it would be "enormously beneficial" to show that type of force "in perpetuity."
"I think it would be enormously beneficial to the region as well as Afghanistan," Graham said on NBC’s "Meet the Press." "We have had air bases all over the world and a couple of air bases in Afghanistan would allow the Afghan security forces an edge against the Taliban in perpetuity. It would be a signal to Pakistan that the Taliban are never going to come back. In Afghanistan they could change their behavior. It would be a signal to the whole region that Afghanistan is going to be a different place.
"And if the Afghan people want this relationship, they are going to have to earn it. But I hope that they will seek a relationship with the United States so we can have an enduring relationship, economic and militarily and politically, and a couple of air bases in Afghanistan will give us an edge military, give the Afghan security forces an edge militarily to ensure that the country never goes back into the hands of the Taliban, which would be a stabilizing event throughout the whole region."
Lindsey Graham: Permanent U.S. Presence In Afghanistan Would Be ‘Enormously Beneficial’
