Official resigns over Afghan war

A former Marine Corps captain with combat experience in Iraq, Hoh had also served in uniform at the Pentagon, and as a civilian in Iraq and at the State Department. By July, he was the senior U.S. civilian in Zabul province, a Taliban hotbed. But last Full Story »

Posted by Kaizar Campwala - via Washington Post , Publish2 (World), Memeorandum, Digg, Drudge Report

See All Reviews »

Review

Walter Cox
3.7
by Walter Cox - Oct. 27, 2009

An informative article that conveys both the character and experience of Matthew Hoh and the situation on the ground in Afghanistan. What the article does not provide is adequate context: Why did the United States, after 9/11, decide that invading Afghanistan and deposing the Taliban was so essential? And, if it was so essential eight years ago, why is leaving now a viable option?

Unlike most Americans I was not convinced that our invasion of Afghanistan in the wake of 9/11 was a good idea. There is no question that we needed to dismantle the al-Qaeda training camps, and our distaste for the Islamist rule of the Taliban was understandable. Yet I was too familiar with the Soviet experience, especially their fierce and unending conflict with the very localized tribalism that this article discusses, to believe that a countrywide occupation could be successful. If we are to stay in Afghanistan, I believe we must define strictly limited objectives and leave the mountainous tribal villages to their own devices--even if this means al-Qaeda once again manages to establish training camps in the tribal areas. (BTW, I supported our invasion of Iraq to a greater degree, largely because I knew that during the 1980's the U.S. had provided Saddam with biological weapons starter kits that could be passed on to terrorist cells (http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_cr/s092002.html) . The WMD threat was real, though it was never nuclear.)

See All Reviews »

Walter's Rating

Overall
3.7

Good
from 12 answers
Quality
3.6
Facts
4.0
Fairness
4.0
Sourcing
4.0
Style
4.0
Context
2.0
Depth
4.0
Enterprise
4.0
Relevance
5.0
Popularity
4.0
Recommendation
5.0
Credibility
3.0
More How our ratings work »