Email Message
This form does not yet contain any fields.
    What this site's about

    This site is about libertarian ideas, politics, economics, government, freedom, property rights, entrepreneurship, innovation, objectivty and other such stuff important to humans. I uphold libertarian principles and believe wholeheartedly in minimal government, or no government if it would work -- this blog explains why.

    Bookmark and Share
    Blog Ratings
    Bloggers' Rights at EFF
    Libertarian reading suggestions
    « Up with Chris Hayes 2/5/2012 -- The Progressive angle | Main | President? Maybe it doesn't matter »
    Saturday
    Feb042012

    Small interventions are still interventions

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/world/asia/us-plans-a-shift-to-elite-forces-in-afghanistan.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

    Although I think it's past time to streamline our national defense, we still need to keep in mind the difference between military interventionism and national defense. Creating small special force units in Afghanistan and Pakistan and the mideast in general will not make our interventions invisible and consequence free. The region will react to small interventions in the same way they react to big interventions. As long as we maintain a military presence in the mideast which attempts to influence governments and tribes, there will be suspicion and resentment. The idea that we are just now training Afghanistan forces is ludricrous, whether it's true or not. We've had time to train the military forces of 20 nations.

    The Big Heads of our military/industrial complex are planning a decades long presence in Afghanistan and Pakistan and any other mideast country they feel needs adjustment. This will be less expensive in the short-run, and it'll be sold as minor involvement to ensure Afghanistan troops can handle any challenges, but long term it will waste billions of dollars and create far more enemies than are eliminated.

    We should be very concerned if the new plan is to create hi-tech, invisible killing groups with general directives to stealthily intervene and influence. They'll be hidden from the public eye, and it'll no doubt evolve into a small group of technocratic military leaders within the State controlling the direction throughout the mideast, or attempting to control. I expect to read revelations of abuse from these new missions, with each revelation dismissed as conspiracy lunacy -- there will be a joke about black helicopters thrown in for good measure. From Clinton to Bush to Obama, our Presidents are a tad too enthralled with the hi-tech potential for power games and intrique. This kind of dark, secret power is too dangerous in the hands of a few individuals. Congress has to step up their oversight -- transparency, although all hawks will resist it by claiming a vital need for secrecy, has to be part of any military transformation.