February 02, 2008 What happens when one side is more into it than the other…

Looking at that map (at the bottom), you realise what a serious and genuine commitment America have made to Afghanistan. Unlike Iraq, war in Afghanistan was justified, perhaps necessary, not just for the States, but the world in general, and definitely for the inhabitants. But the pussyfooting from the other member states of Nato makes me fucking sick. The more hesitation they show, the more difficult the mission becomes, because the insurgents get the psychological boost of knowing that not everyone's hearts are in it (those that have international news access), and the numerical boost of having fewer enemies to fight. Flood the country with troops from Nato countries and put the phrase 'overwhelming force' to good use - the current mandate is 3500, push it to maybe 5000, or even 6000, or make it proportional, say 15% of every country's army (if we're not past that already), or whatever's a realistic number given other commitments (I don't have all that information, surprisingly). Push ISAF from 40,000 to 80,000, or 100,000, and the country' infrastructure may improve to accommodate them, which can only be a bonus. The insurgency is a cancer that needs treatment, and the longer you fuck about with your fears of chemo, the worse it's gonna get. The analogy also extends because there is a cause, as well, or a variety of them, and those need to be fought in a different way, but showing steadfast commitment is one of the ways to show Islamic extremism that it won't be tolerated. I'm not sure where I stand on Harper's threat to pull troops, but I can definitely understand where he's coming from. Is NATO going the way of the UN, becoming a figurehead, with no real power, to be shown up whenever we please? That remains to be seen...