WORDS: 597 — I spent years in the military carrying a gun and defending my country as an NCO in charge of men and assets. If anyone understands military strategy it’s me. I waited at the phone for the call from any sitting President (or standing one either) to provide my valuable insight, and just crickets. They could have avoided all their troubles. If only they called me first…….
Well.. okay… I embellished just a little. My military gun-carrying was in guarding airplanes. In fact.. the only military asset I was in charge of was that gun while on duty… oh.. and making sure the nuke in the belly of a couple B-52’s didn’t fall into the hands of those godless Commies. So given I missed out on War College back in the day.. I pretty much don’t know much about grand military strategies. But I do have a little knowledge to simply “toss it out there” for observation and discussion.
———————————————————————————–
Our Afghan Friends And That Promise
When our military travels around the world, especially in hot spots, there’s no question we ask the indigenous citizens for their assistance for a variety of things. Obviously in Afghanistan our troops have received invaluable help from Afghans being interpreters, as well as assisting with embassy duties and a myriad of other services. In exchange, and for inducement to meet the expediency of the mission at hand, we offer a wage, support, and even training on weapons as many of our field interpreters also take part in fighting as certain situations may require an all hands on deck defensive posture. This is when we hear the stories of interpreters saving the lives of troops in distress. But here’s my question…
Is it prudent to include in our inducement to get local support from the citizenry to promise that if they help us we will get them to safety, to a life in America as well as their entire family? For one thing, not sure a promise like that tends to favor optimism in mission success. In other words, it’s like making the promise.. “Help us and if things go badly and we have to leave your country we will transport you and your family to America.”. I might guess that the promise should be… “Help us for two years and we will then move you and your family to America.” In that case, even if our mission is not completed an interpreter can leave on his own following the normal application process. But what I am getting at is why make that promise at all? Seems you would appeal to the person’s basic patriotism and/or faith in the future of their country… “We will give you a wage and support while you serve, and documents that you served should you wish to apply for entry to the U.S. on your own.” We leave out the “get out of jail free” promise. If we had done that in Afghanistan we’d not be in this moral dilemma of having to make do to our 20 year word given to the tune of 40,000 people spread across the countryside. For now we are obligated.. and most certainly many military members are grateful for their lives from the help these Afghan friends gave our troops. I’m not minimizing that. I am simply suggesting the next time we feel obligated to invade another country we make the promise a bit different… and don’t. After all, our people are serving out of a sense of patriotism.. in “your” country, so, why can’t they do that as well?
When foreign troops go to any country to assist one side or the other in a civil war or a ‘liberation’ exercise, the inhabitants of that country should never expect a promise of relocation elsewhere, and that promise should never be made, or even implied. In the past, that has rarely happened, and Afghanistan is a glaring example of how not to make promises you cannot keep.
I saw one elderly Afghan being interviewed on the BBC, as he was trying to get past British troops guarding an airport gate. He told the reporter he had worked for the British for 20 years, as a gardener in the embassy grounds. Not supporting troops on the front line, acting as an interpreter, or being used in some covert manner against the Taliban. Just watering the plants and doing some weeding for a weekly wage.
But he still insisted he should be flown out to England, and allowed to live here with all of his family coming along too.
I doubt that any gardener was ever made any promise, or told to expect a peaceful life in the UK if we pulled out.
Best wishes, Pete.
Oh I fully agree, Pete. We failed as well to understand that leaving that kind of “gate” open (not relating to the airport gates) simply allows desperate people an avenue to just enhance the chaos of departure. Not unlike fighting for a lifeboat seat on the Titanic.
Has anyone asked what the life will be for the refugees? Islamophobia should once again raise its ugly head…and what will their life be? Yet more consequences of that war. chuq
Well, chuq…. you have 20 years of educated women over there now who have tasted a bit of “women’s lib”.. and likely a few kids who grew to manhood and got educated in the time period as well. In that alone they are all way ahead of the Taliban, Isis, and the whole bunch of Islamic nutjobs. You never know.. there could be a civil war brewing.
It sill be interesting to observe any transformation. chuq
I’d be hesitant to offer blanket refugee status to any who assisted us, as a matter of policy. As we are seeing now, it’s not always realistic to make good on a promise like that….and we’ve actually done a phenomenal job of evacuating not only those who have worked alongside us, but nearly anyone else [after being vetted] who desired to leave.
Certainly, priority should go to those indigenous persons who have worked closely with our forces, and have provided valuable service that would mark them for retribution upon any withdrawal. But the feasibility of doing more drops precipitously after that.
Yes.. you are correct… Jeff(?) (the “real” Jeff Daniels or just one of the many?)
One of the many, and the obscure!
Ah.. ok.. so I won’t hit you up for a few grand to buy a car.