• 139 days Could Crypto Overtake Traditional Investment?
  • 143 days Americans Still Quitting Jobs At Record Pace
  • 145 days FinTech Startups Tapping VC Money for ‘Immigrant Banking’
  • 148 days Is The Dollar Too Strong?
  • 149 days Big Tech Disappoints Investors on Earnings Calls
  • 150 days Fear And Celebration On Twitter as Musk Takes The Reins
  • 151 days China Is Quietly Trying To Distance Itself From Russia
  • 152 days Tech and Internet Giants’ Earnings In Focus After Netflix’s Stinker
  • 155 days Crypto Investors Won Big In 2021
  • 156 days The ‘Metaverse’ Economy Could be Worth $13 Trillion By 2030
  • 156 days Food Prices Are Skyrocketing As Putin’s War Persists
  • 159 days Pentagon Resignations Illustrate Our ‘Commercial’ Defense Dilemma
  • 159 days US Banks Shrug off Nearly $15 Billion In Russian Write-Offs
  • 162 days Cannabis Stocks in Holding Pattern Despite Positive Momentum
  • 163 days Is Musk A Bastion Of Free Speech Or Will His Absolutist Stance Backfire?
  • 163 days Two ETFs That Could Hedge Against Extreme Market Volatility
  • 165 days Are NFTs About To Take Over Gaming?
  • 166 days Europe’s Economy Is On The Brink As Putin’s War Escalates
  • 169 days What’s Causing Inflation In The United States?
  • 170 days Intel Joins Russian Exodus as Chip Shortage Digs In
Is The Bull Market On Its Last Legs?

Is The Bull Market On Its Last Legs?

This aging bull market may…

Another Retail Giant Bites The Dust

Another Retail Giant Bites The Dust

Forever 21 filed for Chapter…

  1. Home
  2. Markets
  3. Other

Fool's Errand: NATO Pledges Four More Years of War in Afghanistan

The longest war in US history just got even longer. As NATO wrapped up its 2016 Warsaw Summit, the organization agreed to continue funding Afghan security forces through the year 2020. Of course with all that funding comes US and NATO troops, and thousands of contractors, trainers, and more.

President Obama said last week that the US must keep 3,000 more troops than planned in Afghanistan. The real reason is obvious: the mission has failed and Washington cannot bear to admit it. But Obama didn't put it that way. He said:

"It is in our national security interest, especially after all the blood and treasure we've invested over the years, that we give our partners in Afghanistan the best chance to succeed."

This is how irrational Washington's logic is. Where else but in government would you see it argued that you cannot stop spending on a project because you have already spent so much to no avail? In the real world, people who invest their own hard-earned money in a failed scheme do something called "cut your losses." Government never does that.

Isn't 15 years of US "blood and treasure" enough of a "best chance" to succeed?

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg announced at the summit that thanks to an additional billion dollars in NATO member-country donations, the organization had come up with close to the $5 billion per year that it has pledged to the Afghan government. Of that $5 billion you can guess who is paying the lion's share. That's right, we are. We send $3.45 billion every year to, according to Transparency International, the third most corrupt country on earth -- while Americans struggle with unemployment, stagnant wages, and inflation. That is why I always say that foreign aid is money stolen from poor people in the United States and sent to rich people overseas.

NATO head Stoltenberg said, "Our message is clear: Afghanistan doesn't stand alone. We're committed for the long haul." How nice of the Norwegian politician to commit Americans to financing the war in Afghanistan for "the long haul."

When I suggested in a recent interview that the only sensible US policy in Afghanistan would be to bring all the troops home, the host asked whether I was worried the Taliban would rush in to fill the vacuum. That's what has already happened, I said. The Taliban are stronger than ever in Afghanistan. They control more territory than at any time since the original US invasion in 2001. Despite 15 years of US interventionism, nearly 2,500 dead US soldiers, and well over a trillion dollars, Afghanistan is no closer to being a model democracy than it was before 9/11. It's a failed policy. It's a purposeless war. It is a failed program.

The neocons argue that Iraq, Libya, and other US interventions fell apart because the US did not stay long enough. As usual they are wrong. They failed and they will continue to fail because they cannot succeed. You cannot invade a country, overthrow its government, and build a new country from the ground up. It is a fool's errand and Washington has turned most Americans into fools. It's time to end this game and get back to the wise foreign policy of the founders: non-intervention in the affairs of others.

 


Buy Ron Paul's latest book, Swords into Plowshares, here.

 

Back to homepage

Leave a comment

Leave a comment