U.S. official resigns over Afghan war; no longer knows why nation is fighting

[laststeamtrain]

U.S. official resigns over Afghan war
State Department member, a former Marine, says he no longer knows why nation is fighting

By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 27, 2009

When Matthew Hoh joined the Foreign Service early this year, he was exactly the kind of smart civil-military hybrid the administration was looking for to help expand its development efforts in Afghanistan.

A former Marine Corps captain with combat experience in Iraq, Hoh had also served in uniform at the Pentagon, and as a civilian in Iraq and at the State Department. By July, he was the senior U.S. civilian in Zabul province, a Taliban hotbed.

But last month, in a move that has sent ripples all the way to the White House, Hoh, 36, became the first U.S. official known to resign in protest over the Afghan war, which he had come to believe simply fueled the insurgency.

"I have lost understanding of and confidence in the strategic purposes of the United States' presence in Afghanistan," he wrote Sept. 10 in a four-page letter to the department's head of personnel. "I have doubts and reservations about our current strategy and planned future strategy, but my resignation is based not upon how we are pursuing this war, but why and to what end."

The reaction to Hoh's letter was immediate. Senior U.S. officials, concerned that they would lose an outstanding officer and perhaps gain a prominent critic, appealed to him to stay.

<snip>

With "multiple, seemingly infinite, local groups," he wrote, the insurgency "is fed by what is perceived by the Pashtun people as a continued and sustained assault, going back centuries, on Pashtun land, culture, traditions and religion by internal and external enemies. The U.S. and Nato presence in Pashtun valleys and villages, as well as Afghan army and police units that are led and composed of non-Pashtun soldiers and police, provide an occupation force against which the insurgency is justified."

<more>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/26/AR2009102603394.html?hpid=topnews

[Angry Dragon]

1. The right will have a field day with this

The right will use it against Obama and they will forget that Bush started the war and did nothing with it once he decided to go after the oil in Iraq. Bush spent pints of American blood for barrels of oil. It seemed a fair trade to Bush and Cheney.

[bertman]

2. A courageous American who sees what is happening and stands up to the Powers

That Be.

We have all been so brainwashed by the Corporate Media Propaganda Machine that we only see this in terms of political maneuvering and what the military wants. We are the invaders. The Afghans have been repelling invaders for THOUSANDS of years and they're not going to give up because it's the good ole U.S. of A. this time.

Unfortunately for President Obama, he's dealing with the all-powerful Military-Industrial-Corporate Complex. They don't like to take NO for an answer.

Thank you, Matthew Hoh for your courage and your patriotism and your service to our nation.

Recommend.

Thanks for posting this, laststeamtrain.

[IndianaGreen]

3. It was Obama who put the 'peace option' off the table. He chose to go deeper into the quagmire.

And he will go the way of LBJ.

[bertman]

5. I don't disagree with you, Indiana Green. President Obama is a practical man who knows

that pushing too hard against the MICC can have dire consequences for the pusher. I think he'll try to be more incremental in his approach and will cause us to spend many years, many lives, and many billions in Vietghanistan.

[Tutankhamun]

4. We're in Afghanistan for the same reason we've always been there: The TAPI oil pipeline.

[Lagomorph]

6. Try to imagine an America where...

...the only money comes from illegal drug sales and the country is in a permanent battle for turf for the last 220 years. Your neighbors rat you out for the reward money and you or your family are killed based on rumors, not actual evidence. Fundamentalist kill squads compete with gang kill squads for influence in every neighborhood. People knock on your door and tell you what they want you to do, and you'd better do it. Somebody has to die in every neighborhood just to send "the message". If you have land, they tell you to plant a crop or your family dies, and then come and take 20% of it. If you can't produce, they drag your children off for their army.

If you're gay, the straights kill you, if you're straight, the gays kill you, if you're a woman, you're property. If you go somewhere where you're not known, you're dragged into a room and interrogated.

The only thing they agree on is they all hate and fear the government.

This is similar to what we faced in Vietnam, as well. Trying to win the hearts and minds of people who live on parts of the planet where people are part of the food chain.

Now, try to establish an elected government, social reforms and personal freedom in that environment.

[Bluenorthwest]

7. Show me a county where 'the gays' kill the straights

I'm sorry, but it is always the other way around, and one side is not just like the other. I get your point, but that is one stinking way to put it. Because it has never been true anywhere on the face of the Earth, but straights have held out and out pogroms against GLBT people many times.
So I wanted to make that clear.

[Lagomorph]

8. it happens, not often, but....

I was telling a story. It fits into Lore more than anywhere else. The places where it happens try not to acknowledge it.

Pick any country where they say "there is no homosexuality in "____"

http://www.adherents.com/misc/hsk.html