Kingu Kurimuzon
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2013
- Messages
- 20,940
- MBTI Type
- I
- Enneagram
- 9w8
- Instinctual Variant
- sp/sx
In my book the starting idea wasn't bad, turning Afghanistan into a stable democracy is a worthy goal. However the strategy was a total miss, since nothing really was invested into the fundamental development of the country. What then opened the path for permanent conflict. While development would probably even save money since this mess would have probably ended long time ago. I mean after a certain point this was a problem that you can't rally solve with guns, especially if you don't want to do massive war crimes. Iraq was basically the exact same story, something should have been built on the ruins of the regime.
turning it into a stable democracy was never the real goal, and even if it was, is it really the USA's place to dictate how other nations should govern themselves? I think they need to find their own way. There is a natural progression or course a nation like Afghanistan can take to become a democracy, but they have to find it on their own.
I can see exceptions, for instance we effectively converted Japan into a democratic nation, but that was a much different nation to work with. They were already largely modernized and moving to their current system wasn't as huge a leap--their culture was also a little more primed for the democratic, capitalist models than Afghanistan presently is. We also invested way more resources into Japan than we did into Afghanistan.