Trump To Continue War In Afghanistan, Echoes Ghost Of Richard Nixon, Pakistan Next Target?

By Brandon Turbeville

Only days ago, I wrote an article addressing the growing tension in the country entitled “From Charlottesville To Boston, America Is Falling Apart At The Seams,” where I stated, “Once again, it looks like Trump has been routed by the Deep State. Expect more foreign policy aggression and more domestic oppression in the very near future as the Deep State grabs the wheel and helps Trump keep it between the lines.” My prediction came true only little more than a day after the article was published.

After days of being subjected to accusations of Nazism, white supremacy, white nationalism and the like simply for not condemning one violent group (and leaving the other untouched) fast enough and then for only condemning the group three to five times in two days, the Trump administration was once again feeling the pressure of a Deep State and corporate media industrial complex. (Please note, this is not to say that Trump himself was ever anything but a member of the establishment. However, there is clearly an element inside the American establishment that is acting against him in an effort to direct and contain the President and any penchant he has for independence.)

On the evening of August 22, Donald Trump gave a speech outlining his strategy for Afghanistan. What he did was outline how far he is moving ahead with the Deep State’s agenda of remaining in Afghanistan under the guise of “defeating terrorism.” From heroin production to physical strategic positioning and influence in the region, particularly in regards to Russia, the imperialists in the U.S. government have no intention of leaving this country, at least not without a fully staffed puppet government in place.

After bizarre statements that sounded vaguely religious suggesting we should “open our hearts to patriotism,” Trump proceeded to unveil his plan to continue the war in Afghanistan but with even less transparency than his predecessor.

What’s more, Trump essentially admitted the course which he intends to follow is the wrong one, going against even his own instincts.

“My original instinct was to pull out. And historically, I like following my instincts,” Trump said. “But all my life I’ve heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk in the Oval Office, in other words, when you’re president of the United States.”

In other words, Trump actually knows that pulling out of Afghanistan is the right thing to do but he is not going to do it. Years from now, when history is being analyzed for tragic decisions, Trump’s instinct may be remembered as one of the most perilously ignored items of our time. For that reason, if Trump has any inclination toward wanting to see the United States in a better condition than when he took over, he’d better discard the advice of his warmongering neo-con cabinet and trust his own instincts to end foreign adventures such as the one taking place in Afghanistan.

Nevertheless, after stating that he then went on to study Afghanistan from every conceivable angle, Trump stated,

After many meetings, over many months, we held our final meeting last Friday at Camp David with my cabinet and generals to complete our strategy.

I arrived at three fundamental conclusion about America’s core interests in Afghanistan. First, our nation must seek an honorable and enduring outcome worthy of the tremendous sacrifices that have been made, especially the sacrifices of lives. The men and women who serve our nation in combat deserve a plan for victory. They deserve the tools they need and the trust they have earned to fight and to win.

Second, the consequences of a rapid exit are both predictable and unacceptable. 9/11, the worst terrorist attack in our history, was planned and directed from Afghanistan because that country was ruled by a government that gave comfort and shelter to terrorists.

A hasty withdrawal would create a vacuum for terrorists, including ISIS and Al Qaeda, would instantly fill just as happened before Sept. 11. And as we know, in 2011, America hastily and mistakenly withdrew from Iraq. As a result, our hard-won gains slipped back into the hands of terrorist enemies. Our soldiers watched as cities they had fought for and bled to liberate, and won, were occupied by a terrorist group called ISIS. The vacuum we created by leaving too soon gave safe haven for ISIS to spread, to grow, recruit and launch attacks. We cannot repeat in Afghanistan the mistake our leaders made in Iraq.

Third, and finally, I concluded that the security threats we face in Afghanistan and the broader region are immense. Today, 20 U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organizations are active in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the highest concentration in any region anywhere in the world.

For its part, Pakistan often gives safe haven to agents of chaos, violence and terror. The threat is worse because Pakistan and India are two nuclear-armed states whose tense relations threaten to spiral into conflict. And that could happen.

And with that we have the appearance of the ghost of Richard Nixon. Trump’s desire for an “honorable and enduring outcome” echoes the very similar statements by Nixon regarding a policy toward Vietnam that would bring “peace with honor.” For those who may remember, Nixon’s policy did eventually result in the ending of the Vietnam war but only after expanding it in Vietnam and far beyond Vietnamese borders. It also ended with his own resignation from office.

Ironically, the words of another warmonger come to mind when reading the new “peace with honor” Trump policy. As John Kerry asked Congress in 1971, “How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?” It may have been the last time John Kerry ever asked an honest question? Congress’ answer, of course, was much like it would be today if someone would ever bother to ask the question – “Easy.”

As to Trump’s second point, it is telling that nowhere does he mention that the alleged terrorists on 9/11 were mostly Saudi Arabian nor did he mention that KSA funded and continues to fund terrorists to this day. Instead, he focused solely on the alleged role Afghanistan played, despite all the evidence pointing toward the fact that Osama bin Laden, the alleged mastermind of 9/11, was an American CIA asset before and during the 9/11 attacks. These statements were made in the face of all the evidence pointing away from anything to do with Afghanistan and back toward the Western intelligence community, particularly that of the United States.[1]

Trump also claimed to be worried about what would happen in the event of a swift American withdrawal from Afghanistan. This is one of the few areas where one can see Trump’s point. After all, the reality is that the Taliban may very well seize power in the country yet again and the United States may be back to square one. But is it the American responsibility to determine what type of government Afghanistan chooses or maintains? In his own speech, Trump states that the days of “nation building” are over. Yet that is precisely what the United States is continuing to do.

After 16 years of warfare, troops, and military equipment, the Taliban is stronger today than it was shortly after the United States invaded. America has lost the war in Afghanistan. The Taliban controlled Afghanistan before the United States invaded and it may very well control it when the United States leaves. But is it the right thing to continue an occupation of a country that fundamentally does not want America there, regardless of whether or not they support or oppose the Taliban? Is that actually the moral choice? For that matter, is it the proper strategic choice? How many empires have come to Afghanistan to die? Why is Afghanistan worth so much blood and treasure if the goal is not to expand that empire further? The Taliban is no threat to the United States and theocratic totalitarian rule never bothers America in other countries such as Saudi Arabia or Bahrain so why should it worry about Afghanistan? Isn’t the question of who rules Afghanistan a question for Afghanis? Lastly, after years of bombing and droning wedding parties, civilians, and children, how can anyone justify the American occupation of this country on anything resembling a moral premise?

In fact, Trump, during his speech, stated that “Someday, after an effective military effort, perhaps it will be possible to have a political settlement that includes elements of the Taliban in Afghanistan. But nobody knows if or when that will ever happen.” Some might argue that Trump is simply providing himself wiggle room to allow the eventual withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan after a negotiation with the Taliban. But what is the point of that? Why fight at all if the Taliban will be allowed power? This statement and the questions that arise out of it simply demonstrate the absurdity of the entire operation. It only serves to prove the point of those of us who argue for an immediate and total withdrawal.

In the words of former Congressman Ron Paul about Iraq, “We marched right in there, we can march right out.”

One other important point is that, while Trump seems so concerned about Islamic terrorism and the results of pulling out of Afghanistan, he makes no mention of ending American support for these same terrorists. After all, the United States controls ISIS, al-Qaeda, and the vast majority of others in tandem with Saudi Arabia and Qatar but not a word was mentioned, for obvious reasons, about these connections.

Casually lying with claims that the United States “pulled out too soon” in Iraq and thus ISIS was able to take over, Trump not only continued the same narrative pushed by the Obama administration but has locked himself into an intellectual and political quagmire, arguing against “leaving too soon,” the same argument, by the way, that Obama made. The truth is that the United States never pulled out of Iraq. Obama simply had a “mission accomplished” moment a la Bush while thousands of troops and contractors remained. And what of ISIS? How exactly did that massive convoy of Toyota trucks with armies of trained terrorists attached to them make it across the desert unnoticed until the organization had made so many gains?

Overall, Trump was light on the specifics, except to say that further word on Afghanistan operations would be mum. Trump stated that he would no longer announce troop numbers or strategy for the war. He did, however, state that attacks would be forthcoming. He stated,

We will not talk about numbers of troops or our plans for further military activities. Conditions on the ground, not arbitrary timetables, will guide our strategy from now on. America’s enemies must never know our plans or believe they can wait us out.

I will not say when we are going to attack, but attack we will.

No one ever doubted that. But notice also the rest of Trump’s statement where he says that “conditions on the ground, not arbitrary timetables” will govern America’s Afghanistan strategy. No doubt John McCain, if he were lucid enough to be aware of Trump’s statement at all, is most pleased with the direction America is going. After all, McCain has been calling for hundred-year wars for quite some time.

Trump also touted his previous decisions to give more authority to commanders on the ground and to essentially ease up restrictions on operational military forces. He said,

I have already lifted restrictions the previous administration placed on our war fighters that prevented the secretary of defense and our commanders in the field from fully and swiftly waging battle against the enemy.

Micromanagement from Washington, D.C., does not win battles. They’re won in the field, drawing upon the judgment and expertise of wartime commanders, and front-line soldiers, acting in real time with real authority, and with a clear mission to defeat the enemy.

In addition to comments about Afghanistan, Trump also spoke about Pakistan and its relationship to terrorist factions and the harboring and funding of terrorist organizations. He stated,

For its part, Pakistan often gives safe haven to agents of chaos, violence and terror. The threat is worse because Pakistan and India are two nuclear-armed states whose tense relations threaten to spiral into conflict. And that could happen.

. . . . .

The next pillar of our new strategy is to change the approach in how to deal with Pakistan. We can no longer be silent about Pakistan’s safe havens for terrorist organizations, the Taliban and other groups that pose a threat to the region and beyond.

Pakistan has much to gain from partnering with our effort in Afghanistan. It has much to lose by continuing to harbor criminals and terrorists. In the past, Pakistan has been a valued partner. Our militaries have worked together against common enemies. The Pakistani people have suffered greatly from terrorism and extremism. We recognize those contributions and those sacrifices.

But Pakistan has also sheltered the same organizations that try every single day to kill our people. We have been paying Pakistan billions and billions of dollars at the same time they are housing the very terrorists that we are fighting.

Again, there is a notable lack of condemnation in Trump’s statements for Saudi Arabia, a brutal state that has done all the same things he accuses Pakistan of doing. Pakistan’s ISI has, of course, supported terrorist organizations in the past and it has done so in coordination with the United States intelligence community. Now, with Trump’s unforeseen criticism of the nuclear state, many are becoming concerned that one of America’s next targets will be Pakistan, yet another potential nuclear powder keg.

At the end of the day, Trump has remained unclear as to how the U.S. will change its strategy and role in Afghanistan. However, the vague nature of his statements doesn’t look good for peace-loving people. But such is the day-to-day tradition of America in the 21st Century. On the other hand, if you like war, things are looking pretty good right now.

Notes:

[1] Griffin, David Ray. The New Pearl Harbor. Interlink Pub Group.

Brandon Turbeville – article archive here – is the author of seven books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident, volume 1 and volume 2, The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria, The Difference it Makes: 36 Reasons Why Hillary Clinton Should Never Be President, and Resisting The Empire: The Plan To Destroy Syria And How The Future Of The World Depends On The Outcome. Turbeville has published over 1000 articles on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville’s radio show Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV. His website is BrandonTurbeville.com He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at) gmail.com.

This article may be freely shared in part or in full with author attribution and source link.

Image Credit: The Anti-Media