« What's Up New Computer Edition | Main | One Of These things Is Not Like The Other »

10 November 2009

Gormless Idiot

The WaPo's Richard "Therapy" Cohen looks at Afghanistan and concludes:

There are many good reasons to put as much as we can in Afghanistan. But America has been at war there since 2001, at war in Iraq since 2003, and like Britain between the world wars, is out of both treasure and patience. Leave Afghanistan to the drones and the Special Forces. It's no way to win, but it's a good way not to lose.

I know that Cohen lives in a little Georgetown bubble but is it too much to ask that he do a little research before he sets pen to paper? Perhaps some Jane Meyer?

Peter W. Singer, the author of “Wired for War,” a recent book about the robotics revolution in modern combat, argues that the drone technology is worryingly “seductive,” because it creates the perception that war can be “costless.” Cut off from the realities of the bombings in Pakistan, Americans have been insulated from the human toll, as well as from the political and the moral consequences. Nearly all the victims have remained faceless, and the damage caused by the bombings has remained unseen. In contrast to Gaza, where the targeted killing of Hamas fighters by the Israeli military has been extensively documented—making clear that the collateral damage, and the loss of civilian life, can be severe—Pakistan’s tribal areas have become largely forbidden territory for media organizations. As a result, no videos of a drone attack in progress have been released, and only a few photographs of the immediate aftermath of a Predator strike have been published.

The seeming unreality of the Predator enterprise is also felt by the pilots. Some of them reportedly wear flight suits when they operate a drone’s remote controls. When their shifts end, of course, these cubicle warriors can drive home to have dinner with their families. Critics have suggested that unmanned systems, by sparing these combatants from danger and sacrifice, are creating what Sir Brian Burridge, a former British Air Chief Marshal in Iraq, has called “a virtueless war,” requiring neither courage nor heroism. According to Singer, some Predator pilots suffer from combat stress that equals, or exceeds, that of pilots in the battlefield. This suggests that virtual killing, for all its sterile trappings, is a discomfiting form of warfare. Meanwhile, some social critics, such as Mary Dudziak, a professor at the University of Southern California’s Gould School of Law, argue that the Predator strategy has a larger political cost. As she puts it, “Drones are a technological step that further isolates the American people from military action, undermining political checks on...endless war.”

I mean, it was published in a periodical that all the smarty-pants read and everything. But then, anyone who wrote of the Iraq War, "On the contrary, I thought. We are a good country, attempting to do a good thing. In a post-Sept. 11 world, I thought the prudent use of violence could be therapeutic. The United States had the power to change things for the better, and those who would do the changing -- the fighting -- were, after all, volunteers. This mattered to me" isn't exactly the sort of person who's big on challenging his own assumptions.

And do enjoy this bit of Cohen's wit:

Sooner or later, truly evil people either get talk shows or killed by pilotless drones.

Ellen DeGeneres and Osama bin Laden are just alike! That's a laff-riot!

Thank you once again, Graham and Weymouth and Bauchli and Hiatt, for bringing us the finest in political analysis.


.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c23269e20128756f5f4b970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Gormless Idiot:

Comments

Yeah, it's just like playing video games. So far this is probably one of my biggest disappointments in Obama. But, I admit to subscribing Ninja qualities to Obama, so here's hoping the plan is to send 40K troops and when that still doesn't make a dent, then on January 22, 2013, he can start bringing what's left of them home.

Of course that sucks for those who won't make it home and their families.

This assumes Obama's reelection.

The longest US war was Vietnam - 8 yrs, 5 mos*

In January, 2013 the Afghan War will have lasted 12 yrs, 3 mos.

Just sayin'

My guess is the troops will out of Afghanistan before 2013 or they won't be leaving until well after that year.

*Fixing date for the Vietnam War is something of a fool's errand. The above denotes the official presence of US combat ground troops.


.

So should he bring the troops home, do you think he could elected? I have my doubts, but what do I know?

Honestly, I'm not about to predict elections so far away. Given how fluid things are anymore I wouldn't venture to predict next week.

Nonetheless, if the economy is good, genuinely good, in 2012 Obama is returned to the White House regardless of Afghanistan.


.

The comments to this entry are closed.