It has been about 5,000 days since the American military
went into Afghanistan .
If we assume that 200 articles and audio-visual commentaries were made each day
on this subject, we count a million contributions of perhaps 500 words each on
average. This means that half a billion words were uttered on this topic … not
counting the books that were written, the lectures that were given, and the
shows (on big and small screens) that dealt with it.
And yet, during all that time, and despite all those words,
the most important truth that needed to be said was never said. It is that America went into Afghanistan because of 9/11. And
9/11 happened not because America
left a vacuum somewhere on the planet, but because America
overstayed its welcome in Saudi
Arabia . This is what infuriated Usama Bin
Laden; what motivated him to carry out the 9/11 attacks on America .
And because this truth remained hidden – be it deliberately
or inadvertently – all sorts of dots were connected in all sorts of funky ways
to arrive at one and the same funky conclusion: America must go around the globe
searching for vacuums to fill or a slew of 9/11s will hit it and hit its allies
regularly now and forever.
An example that is often cited to show cause and effect is America 's withdrawal from Iraq . Those who wish to see America
involved in perpetual wars anywhere and everywhere around the globe, say that
the withdrawal caused the deterioration of the situation in that country. And
so they argue that America
must not repeat that mistake ever again.
Of course, no one can go back in time and change history to
see what would have happened if America
had not withdrawn from Iraq .
But what we can do is point to the places from which America withdrew and things turned
out well. This would be Vietnam ,
for example. We can also point to the places from which America did not withdraw, and things remained as
bad as ever – like Afghanistan ,
for example.
It would be useful to keep that backgrounder in mind when we
try to make sense of the piece which the editors of the Wall Street Journal
wrote under the title: “Obama's Afghan Reversal” and the subtitle: “Perhaps he
learned something from his Iraq
withdrawal.” It was published in the Journal on October 16, 2015.
What indicates that this editorial was inspired by Jews, and
that it celebrates the years of hysteria they unleashed and maintained to
convince President Obama to reverse his position on the withdrawal of troops
from Afghanistan – is this passage: “It is possible that what drove Mr. Obama's
decision was concern that an Afghanistan overrun would leave his foreign-policy
reputation in tatters.” Never mind that they always said Obama's foreign-policy
reputation has been in tatters from the start. So the question: By what logic
can something that is one thing become the thing it already is? Beats me!
You see, my friend – when the Jews decide to denigrate
someone, they interpret everything surrounding him or her in personal terms.
And they attribute negative motives to those who act on something – whether the
action that's taken coincides with their Jewish point of view, or it goes
against their grain. Thus, the Journal editors painted Obama as the enemy when
he tried to keep America
out of wars, and they continue to paint him as the enemy now that he reversed
his decision, coming close to their point of view.
Well, maybe we can find in the rest of the piece, the
reasons why the Journal editors still dislike Obama that intensely. Here is one
possible reason: “The central issue now is whether the Administration will do
enough militarily in Afghanistan
to ensure that the war inherited by the next President isn't worse than it is
today.” This means they are worried Obama may not have the kind of war that
will justify and validate their state of hysteria.
Also, they do not like the idea that he only wants to do
“supporting counter-terrorism operations,” something they say, understates the
nature and scale of the threat. They also say it troubles them that he will reduce
troop levels to 5,500 by January 2017, questioning if this will prevent the
Taliban, al Qaeda and ISIS from taking large swaths of Afghanistan .
Finally, the editors of the Wall Street Journal remind the
readers that the US
continues to have 29,000 troops in South Korea , 62 years after the end
of the war there. By that, they mean to say it is okay for America to go
in the places about which they plan to create a Jewish hysteria. Once there, it
will be okay for America
to stay for decades – better yet, stay there forever.
Without explaining why America
is tolerated in South Korea ,
when it was rejected in dozens of other places, the editors assert that the
presence of American troops in South Korea
“allowed East Asia to flourish.”