A Stable Pakistan Needs a Stable Afghanistan

Wall Street Journal by Frederick W. Kagan | Sep. 5, 2009 (Opinion)

The fight against militant Islam must be pursued on both sides of the border.

Critics of the war have suggested we should draw down our troops and force Pakistan to play a larger role in eliminating radical extremists. American concerns about al Qaeda and Taliban operating from Pakistani bases have led to the conventional wisdom that Pakistan matters to the U.S. because of what it could do to help—or hurt—in Afghanistan. The conventional wisdom is wrong as usual. Full Story »

Posted by Kaizar Campwala - via Fair Spin (Right), Opinion Source, Wall Street Journal (Opinion), AllTop

See All Reviews »

View

3.1

by James Canning - Sep. 5, 2009

An ardent cheerleader for the insane US/UK invasion of Iraq, Fred Kagan tries to rally support for the failing US/UK Afghan war. It does not seem to occur to the author that US military activities in Afghanistan have made the security situation worse in both Afghanistan and Palistan. Kagan argues for "winning" the war, when even the president of Afghanistan says bringing in more US troops will not improve the security situation. Kagan apparently has given no thought as to why the US is leading the effort in Afghanistan when this country clearly is not well suited to waging long-term military campaigns in Muslim countries.

Kagan, the American Enterprise Instiitute and the Wall Street Journal played large roles in bringing on the catastrophe in Iraq, and any advice from them needs to be examined carefully. Kagan is a militarist and favors the "imperial America" approach to world affairs- - a strategy that threaten the interests of the US itself.