While I was decompressing over the weekend, Michael Steele set off a firestorm with his less-than-hawkish comments on Afghanistan. Bill Kristol (Weekly Standard) and Andy McCarthy (NRO – The Corner) – among many others – called on Steele to resign; Dr. Ron Paul came to his defense (Frum Forum).
Meanwhile, the bruhaha has led at least one right-of-center blogger close to home (Chris Beer – Mason Conservative). To date, no one else has picked up on this within the Virginia blogosphere, but Jim Bowden and Jerry Fuhrman lodged their criticisms earlier. As one would expect from the rightosphere, their arguments are cogent, probing, and require an answer.
Unfortunately, save for Furhman (more on him later), their conclusions come from an appalling disregard for the facts on the ground.
Most acknowledge that al Qaeda’s presence in Afghanistan is minimal at most and nominal at least. Unfortunately, far too many have forgotten about the role the Taliban has played in all of this. To hear it from some people (almost all on the left), the Taliban were absentee landlords, bamboozled ideologues, or even innocent bystanders.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Lest we forget (as so many apparently have), the Taliban didn’t ignore al Qaeda; nor did they condone it. They embraced it. They used al Qaedites to enforce their brutal rule over Afghanistan (New York Times). According to some reports (relayed by the BBC), Taliban leader “Mullah” Omar and bin Laden are now related by marriage. It was common knowledge that the Taliban relied on a funding stream from al Qaeda to continue controlling Afghanistan (UPI via Newsmax). Mere weeks before 9/11/01, the Taliban appointed bin Laden as their military commander-in-chief.
Unless and until the Taliban is defeated, the Afghan theatre of the WBK War is neither won nor finished, period. The growing chorus of war critics on the right appear to have forgotten that.
So, with all due respect to Chris, that’s why we’re in Afghanistan. Regarding Jim, if any of the factions we have to appease include the Taliban, then the war is not won (to be fair to Jim, he does not name the Taliban as a faction worthy of bribery or payoff, but by my reading of his post, he leaves the door open).
Or, as Mark Steyn so painfully put it (Macleans):
If the Taliban return to even partial power in Afghanistan, the unctuous State Department spokesmen will make the best of it. But the symbolism will be profound, and devastating in what it says about American will.
As for Jerry, I really have no response for him. It is clear to me he understands fully that the Taliban must be destroyed; he just doesn’t trust this Administration to do it. The closer we get to the arbitrary July 2011 withdrawal deadline, the more I will be compelled to agree with him.
For now, though, I hold out hope that, like just about everything else that has come from the Obama campaign or Administration, that withdrawal, too, will have an “expiration date.” We shall see.
Posted by D.J. McGuire 
