GLOBAL AGENDA

The Things We Need to Do Now

Five leading foreign-policy experts offer their recommendations on dealing with some of the world's most difficult and pressing challenges.

By Andrew J. Bacevich | NEWSWEEK
Published Nov 29, 2008
From the magazine issue dated Dec 8, 2008

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: gnosiswithinu @ 02/19/2009 1:33:41 PM

    It's so easy to make judgments regarding Becevitch's perspective-good or bad. Our enemies are not terrorist, they are people who have severe grievances against the US and no one talks about it. It infuriates me to no end that no one in the media is talking about this. Our so called enemies are not insane but behave accordingly when they are being invaded by another country. They will use what little means they have to fight the US and if the tables were turned, we'd be doing the same thing. Our so called enemies are very angry at the injustice perpetrated against them and no until we stop thinking soley for our self interest, nothing will change.

  • Posted By: JT Nichols @ 02/08/2009 10:48:41 AM

    I respect Prof. Bacevich, but he has proven a poor military analyst. He predicted doom and defeat in Iraq and he was wrong. ( http://articles.latimes.com/2005/feb/20/opinion/oe-bacevich20 ). His claim Iran was helped by the Iraq war proved short-sighted, his claim we're hurting Pakistan now is also wrong. Pakistan would be hurt much more by stable extremists boosted by a premature US withdrawal.
    Those of us in the military KNOW we can't win with military alone. We're already using most of Prof. Bacevich's recommendations in Afghanistan, but empowering local leaders requires military strength, just as it did in Iraq. With Iraq won we'll have more men available for Afghanistan. Victory is very possible. US willpower is the limited resource, not US military power.

  • Posted By: SamThornton @ 01/06/2009 1:47:46 AM

    Trooper101st, I wonder how both the article can be right by calling for troop withdrawals and your assertion is right that a "surge in troops" is required to secure some areas. Seems self-contradictory. Seems to me we're in sunk-cost mode in Afghanistan where the overriding issue is loss of face by our government officials rather than some realistic objective. It's difficult for anyone to admit they've messed up, particularly for those who been stridently proclaiming their genius for an extended period of time.

  • Posted By: Trooper101st @ 12/24/2008 12:46:12 PM

    Its gonna take a surge in troops in order to secure some areas, but the article is right. A-stan will never have a strong central gov., it is a feudal society. We will have to buy those off that we can, and eliminate those we can't. The real problem is in P-stan, and cutting them out of our logistics route will give us the latitude we need to hit the T-ban/AQ where they live. You want to kill the "terror tree", go to the tribal areas and RIP OUT THE ROOTS.

  • Posted By: DrZook @ 12/02/2008 1:13:24 PM

    You know folks, if the USA didn't run around messing with the politics of just about every country in the world, they probably wouldn't have any enemies.

    Did you ever notice how nobody seems to make terrorist attacks against Norway or Paraguay or Brazil or Slovakia or Japan or Canada, etc, etc, etc. Could it be because those countries don't invade other countries on thin excuses and try and control their governments and mess with other nations politics?

    The USA currently has troops in 100 countries around the world! How about if Americans try staying in their own country and instead of antagonizing the rest of the world and wasting billions upon billions of dollars on hopeless foreign wars then they might be able to spend those resources on their own people. Then they could rebuild disaters zones like New Orleans and clean up their environment and house their homeless and provide health care for all their citizens.

    The USA would be a freakin' paradise! You w. They would need a fence to keep the illegal immigrants out, they would need a 200 foot high cconcrete wall because everybody on the planet would want to live there!

    But that would be too easy.

    • Posted By: Forty4 @ 12/02/2008 3:39:06 PM

      If you're an American, you're not living in a neutral country like Norway or Sweden. Had America been neutral during World War II as you wish, you would most likely be speaking German or Japanese, not English. And in case you haven't noticed, America is already a place where we need a fence to keep people out. We have 20 million illegal aliens here, and record numbers of people from other nations apply for citizenship every year. And btw, educate yourself.... Google 'terrorists in Canada", they're there. And in Norway. And in Sweden.

      • Posted By: DrZook @ 12/02/2008 6:26:16 PM

        No I am not an American, thank God! And yours is the sort of paranoid philosophy that is ruining your country. There is a big bloody difference between having to stop an agressive dictator like Hitler who was actively attempting to conquer Europe and the rest of the world through military force and going out of your way to interfere in the politics of El Salvador, Guatemala, Malaysia, Viet Nam, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc, etc.

        Why not try being a neutral country for a while dude. Your country might make some friends in the world. It would be a welcome change for your people and the rest of the world for sure.

        • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 12/12/2008 10:28:46 AM

          Thank God? You have nerve! You don't seem to have any respect for my country and fellow Americans, so why are you here using our American web site? I don't care about your freedom of speech...you lose that right with me because as an American, I have no use for your comments! Bye bye...

        • Posted By: Forty4 @ 12/02/2008 7:44:12 PM

          I didn't think you were an American. It was easy to see that you have no idea of how many times and to what degree the United States is called on to do on a daily basis... and therefore easy for you to criticize. America gives more, does more and has come to the aid of other countries more than any other nation. We've made mistakes, of course. Name one nation who hasn't. But the good we've offered throughout history has far outweighed the bad.

          I could be wrong, but I sense you live in Europe. If so, thank my uncles, along with thousands of other Americans and allies that gave up their lives in combat for a nation of people they didn't even know. Then there's Iraq, who played the UN for a pack of fools for 12 years... now there's Iran, who wants nukes and a sovereign nation wiped off the map.

          You think world politics is so easy. I only wish you were right.

          • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 12/03/2008 10:44:21 AM

            It's been 63 years since WWII. How long do you expect America to be able to rest on the laurels of those who actually fought for Europe 3 generations ago? Our grandfather's assistance to Europe was vital, and I am sure is appreciated, but this generation? With their ludicrous jabbering about "Freedom Fries" and "old Europe"?

            • Posted By: Forty4 @ 12/04/2008 3:34:44 PM

              Dr.Z thinks we should be neutral.... my post was to give him a look at what things might have been if we were neutral during WWII. I do agree with your comment about this generation.

      • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 12/03/2008 10:42:04 AM

        Canadian terrorists?

        Are they after our potatoes? Well, we shall defend Idaho to the last man! Down with the Canuckistanis and their wicked ways!

        • Posted By: Forty4 @ 12/09/2008 7:17:05 PM

          http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/7/9/162022.shtml

          http://www.adl.org/terror/tu/tu_0401_canada.asp

          http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2008/11/19/bc-fbi-seeks-eco-terrorists.html

          http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/05/29/csis-terrorthreat.html

          http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/001032.php

  • Posted By: Forty4 @ 12/11/2008 9:50:49 AM

    Pia, that isn't what I meant. He cut and pasted something from another article from several weeks ago that had nothing whatsoever to do with this topic. I could think of only one reason why he would do that, and I simply didn't think you, or anyone else would care to see this rehashed again. Sorry you misunderstood.

    • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 12/11/2008 8:14:07 PM

      I understand, thank you. I just wanted to clear this up because I did not want to hurt anyone's feelings. This entire issue is going to give me BP. I think you understand too.

      • Posted By: Forty4 @ 12/11/2008 9:30:05 PM

        Thanks... I control my BP with medicine and exercise... only to mess it up when I log in here! Lol. I'm spending less and less time here at Newsweek, and will probably just stop altogether soon. Too many fights lately.

        I can see how my last post below could have been misunderstood, and once again I'm sorry that happened. Blow it off if you can. I won't be posting with that party for obvious reasons, so it won't ever come up again. I should have left it alone to begin with. Too bad we can't edit here at NW.... I would have used it!

        • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 12/11/2008 10:07:53 PM

          There is no need for you to stop blogging. It's all my fault. I'm a dope. I do appreciate all of you say here.

          Do that search for BP soon..okay? Good news.

      • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 12/11/2008 8:59:18 PM

        PS Btw, speaking of the condition which you've mentioned you've had, I read a few articles on it... one is esp. informative. Good news...do a search for BP....

  • Posted By: karaswart @ 12/11/2008 10:49:00 AM


    http://www.genocidebangladesh.org/

  • Posted By: karaswart @ 12/11/2008 10:48:57 AM


    http://www.genocidebangladesh.org/

  • Posted By: jbz7879 @ 12/04/2008 7:23:50 PM

    pakistan must secure its borders as the jews are reinforcing the false rhetoric of terrorism based in pakistan and american media seems to be perpetuating that anti muslim anti pakistani propaganda ,
    pakistan has to cut ties from a hypocritical american admin . who are obviously conspiring against pakistan because of the envy with regards to the nukes -they call the islamic bomb -

    pakistan in the key player in islamic renaissance and it has to sever ties with the obvious enemies and propagate connections with iran and china and saudia which i think is already the case -just to remind the western media that pakistan is not alone and the jewish lobby in washington is behaving rather petulantly in its anti muslim rhetoric WITHOUT A SHRED OF EVIDENCE WHICH IS TRAGIC INDEED -
    WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE ?OR IS IT JUST PARANOIA ABOUT THE ISLAMIC BOMB AND THAT IS TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE AS PAKISTAN SHOULD NEVER COMPROMISE ON THAT EVER.

    • Posted By: karaswart @ 12/11/2008 10:46:00 AM


      http://www.genocidebangladesh.org/

  • Posted By: vstillwell @ 12/02/2008 1:34:53 PM

    Here's how you fix the world: Blast all those idiot, Limbaugh sheep Republicans into outer space. Make sure Palin, Limbaugh, Beck, Dobson and Hannity are on the first ship outta here.

    • Posted By: Forty4 @ 12/02/2008 3:22:43 PM

      Not a word about murdering, hate filled monsters who would slice your throat in a heartbeat, but let's blast Limbaugh and half of America into infinity! Easy to see whose side you're on.

      • Posted By: 40YearR @ 12/02/2008 7:45:04 PM



        You missed, or avoided, the point again. The point was about trigger-happy, howling buffoons. They, and their dupes and sycophants, are a big part of why we haven't gotten it right.

        A 40 year republican

        • Posted By: Forty4 @ 12/02/2008 8:17:27 PM

          I didn't say anything about trigger happy buffoons. You did.

          • Posted By: Forty4 @ 12/02/2008 8:19:13 PM

            And by the way, how would "you" have gotten it right?

            • Posted By: 40YearR @ 12/02/2008 9:25:50 PM



              I busted your ass with your own words. I saved it. Wanna see it again?

              • Posted By: Forty4 @ 12/02/2008 9:31:33 PM

                How about you answer the question before you talk about busting someone's ass?

                • Posted By: 40YearR @ 12/02/2008 9:55:55 PM


                  I WAS answering your question about when I have gotten it right. Rather on point, I'd say. And I noticed you didn't answer mine, you great big brave man...

                  • Posted By: Forty4 @ 12/02/2008 10:11:02 PM

                    Maybe I missed it? The last post you made said I missed or avoided the point again. What point was that and what was the question? And yes, I'd like to see again. My question to you was at least direct: how would "you" have gotten it right?... which you didn't answer.

                    • Posted By: 40YearR @ 12/02/2008 10:53:12 PM



                      Ok, since you keep asking me to show you when I've gotten it right, here it is:


                      Forty4,

                      Let's see, "Bullshit...friggin', pathetic Coward...Coward...F**K...sh!t...whimp"

                      You are the coward, according to your own words and actions.

                      Actions you took. You continued your harangue in response to a blog that ended with me saying that I was signing off. You then turned your abuse to a woman, who you abused and threatened with what "I know".

                      I normally don't use this language, but sometimes it's apropos:

                      Forty4, you're nothing but a Chicken Sh!t bully who cowardly turns your abuse and threats to a woman when you know the man involved has already signed off.

                      In fact, I think your words reveal that you're a liar as well. You will have the opportunity to explain, but I expect you are such a Chicken Sh!t Coward, you will spew about everything but that.

                      I had never blogged to you, but late last night you joined in with someone else who had already pounded on Pia after I had logged off.

                      You called me a coward because someone else was picking on Pia. Your 1st post:

                      "I felt badly when you abandoned her regarding her post to you pleading for your help. Of course, you 'conveniently' had to 'log off' only to show up almost a day later."

                      So you were there. You watched it. You felt sorry for her, and called me a coward for not doing something.

                      You did nothing else, though. You did nothing but feel "sorry" while you watched someone you "like" being picked on.

                      What a Man. Worthy to call me a coward for not doing something about what you...just watched.

                      After I responded to that post, saying I had to log off, you then at 11:26 pm turned your ire toward Pia, accused and insulted her, and threatened her with:

                      "I've watched you a long time. I [YOU, A$$HOLE!] know".

                      You continued to call me a Coward, twice a puss, railing that I should have protected her from the other did when I wasn't there. Your new words:

                      "I felt bad the other night when you pleaded for help and he evaporated...So did Pocolodi...I'd die before I'd leave my girlfriend that way."

                      You ended that post with threats against her, you Chicken Sh!t Cowardly Woman Abuser.

                      Twice you said you watched and did nothing.

                      If the woman you were then abusing were "my girlfriend" you "would die" before you'd let that happen.

                      So, you'll abuse and threaten a woman you "like", but you would go to the death for your girlfriend.

                      Brave man. You are so righteous to call me a coward to have logged off, leaving you to watch and feel sorry for her.

                      Two questions Brave Man:

                      1. Were you lying when you said twice you watched it happen, or were you too chicken to come to her aid?

                      It's one or the other.

                      2. Do you abuse and threaten your girlfriends, or do you save that just for women you like"?

                      You're just a Chicken Sh!t Pig Woman Abuser.

                      Beat your chest Brave Man.

                      • Posted By: Forty4 @ 12/02/2008 11:26:03 PM

                        Of course you couldn't answer the real question.... What a pathetic wimp. I can think of only one reason why you're still beating your chest over this. She doesn't give a sh!t, 40.

                        Grow a pair, why don't you.

                        • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 12/10/2008 10:07:21 PM

                          Forty4- I'm not exactly sure what you mean by your comments.

                        • Posted By: 40YearR @ 12/03/2008 12:02:03 AM


                          Keep thinking you're a brave man, along with whatever other fantasies are important to you. Ironic it is you who feels entitled to call me a wimp... See above.

                          • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 12/09/2008 3:50:54 PM

                            40YearR, thank you for defending me regarding the Pocolodi incident.

                        • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 12/09/2008 3:07:12 PM

                          Forty-if you mean that I don't give a s... about the Pocolodi incident, you are wrong. I care about what Poco said. I do have respect for myself.

                    • Posted By: 40YearR @ 12/02/2008 10:54:49 PM



                      It took a while to find it. :-)

          • Posted By: 40YearR @ 12/02/2008 9:24:43 PM



            The poster you responded to did, so I reminded you, again...

  • Posted By: karaswart @ 12/05/2008 5:35:49 PM

    Comment: December 3rd to December 14th , 1971 is the time that the Pakistani Army Genocide of the Bangladeshi Muslims came to an end. 3 million Muslims were slaughtered by the Pakistani Army in 1971, historically the biggest genocide of Muslims.

  • Posted By: VoiceOne @ 12/03/2008 6:18:53 PM

    .......................................The Nation and the World are ready for a change away from the Right Wing Neocon Republican policies, it is very easy to see that Bush was an incompetent in office. Things will start to move in a better direction after January 20th and we will see more confidence in American leadership and improvements in how America is managed.

    • Posted By: Shanshayla @ 12/04/2008 7:31:11 PM

      You seem to fight with so many here. I'm curious, why do you hang on to the republican name when you despise the party so?

      • Posted By: 40YearR @ 12/04/2008 9:15:46 PM




        I don't despise the party. I despise the ultras, neocons, haters, bigots and religiofascists who infect it and just scream demands to get your own way.

        Thanks for asking.

        A 40 year republican non-ultra-etc.

    • Posted By: 40YearR @ 12/04/2008 6:39:04 PM



      I couldn't agree with you more on this VoiceOne. It was those things, along with the lies, smears, hate, prejudice and propaganda by the republican party in this election, that caused me to cross party lines for the first time ever in 40 years, to vote for Obama.

      As to you biggots who have infected the party, I p!ss on you 'with all my heart.

      A 40 year republican, non neocon and nonhater, that is

  • Posted By: LoveforAllHatredforNone @ 12/04/2008 3:38:00 PM

    VoiceOne is no doubt a Jew. You can't keep fighting all the Muslim enemies you see all over the world. Looking at the 400 refugee camps in Afghanistan where one mother of eleven has nothing to protect her from winter and no food to eat on a rock-filled terrain--should convince you that America has achieved its "victory." If that doesn't satisfy you, I don't know what will? 800 refugee camps? Everyone starving?

    • Posted By: 40YearR @ 12/04/2008 6:33:51 PM



      Your first sentence proved you are sh!tty at picking names for yourself, but not that probably isn't the only thing..

      A 40 year republican

  • Posted By: I respectfully disagree @ 12/03/2008 6:14:35 PM

    I respectfully disagree. In particular, I take issue with your argument's premise that our war in Afghanistan "won't be won militarily", when the solution you propose clearly addresses a military end. I argue this end to be the original (and only) definition of victory, though your argument articulates it as a "political objective": to ensure that terrorist groups like Al Qaeda can't use the country as a safe haven for launching attacks against the West.
    With all due respect, you fight fire with fire. These are the people who drove airplanes into our skyscrapers. No amount of wheeling-and-dealing with heroin farmers or goat herders can keep that from happening again. Only a long-term, focused, and flexible commitment to engage in violence with those who would harm what we love can do that.
    That we would discuss the situation in Iraq in comparison to Afghanistan is interesting. The senior leadership of the American defense apparatus continues to assess what goals are achievable in Afghanistan, given the historic strain on resources presented by U.S. involvement in Iraq. But "redefining victory" in the fashion your argument proposes would be the wrong thing to do.
    The vision of a Sunni Awakening in Afghanistan betrays a misunderstanding of the difference between the conflict in that country and the one in Iraq. The Sunni Awakening was in response to a civil war. The definition of victory in Iraq has come to include an end to said civil war. Sunnis in Iraq actually cared that they couldn't go downtown without getting killed.
    The definition of victory in Afghanistan, which your argument articulates as a "political objective", is not so dear to the parties your argument suggests we outsource it to. Heroin farmers and goat herders could care less if Al-Qaeda lived next door. So someone has to do the caring for them. I argue it is the best-trained, best-equipped, most professional fighting force in world history. Our taxes are better spent on the heroic members of that force than on any warlords' tribute your argument suggests.
    In conclusion, your argument struck me as confusing the achievement of a "political objective" with the victory sought on the morning of Sept. 12, 2001. The establishment of a stable government in Afghanistan may be noble, but it is not what motivated the U.S. invasion. The education of Afghans on "how to govern their affairs" was attempted by imperial powers, and America doesn't number among them. At least, not with respect to Afghanistan.

  • Posted By: queennefertiti23 @ 12/03/2008 10:13:21 AM

    I am thankful that I have joined your circle of readers and would like to share a Blog I wrote on your Global Agenda edition. Love the Take care and God Bless. The link is below:
    http://www.blackplanet.com/your_page/blog/view_posting.html?pid=315250&profile_id=53351941&profile_name=QueenNefertiti23&user_id=53351941&username=QueenNefertiti23

  • Posted By: karaswart @ 12/03/2008 7:43:12 AM

    December 3rd 1971- the beginning of the end of the genocide of the Bengali Muslims perpetrated by Pakistani Soldiers. Over 3 million Bengalis were murdered. Let not the world forget.

  • Posted By: masmanz @ 12/02/2008 8:21:33 PM

    First, calling it a war is a mistake, The war finished in 2002 (if even that can be called a war, given the imbalance in forces). Now, it is pure occupation. al-Qaida is now reduced to two men hiding in a cave somewhere who can do no more than issue a tape every few months. So the real question is why are we still there? Since we do not know the answer to that question we can't tell if we are winning or losing. Period.

    • Posted By: nawawimohamad @ 12/03/2008 4:55:12 AM

      "So the real question is why are we still there?" Ask the people behind the president. They are known as the "Disaster Capitalists" according to Ms Naomi Klein the author of "THE SHOCK DOCTRINE". May be you will get the answer from the book.

  • Posted By: brydges @ 12/02/2008 3:45:32 PM

    This article talks about changing course but offers no other options. Typical of these types of liberals. Hope and Change mean nothing without a plan. Thanks for wasting my time Newsweek (once again).

    • Posted By: rajar @ 12/03/2008 2:45:32 AM

      America should mind its own and forget about occupation and colonialism. the Brits had to give it up. Support education health and living condition in less fortunate countries. don't waste money on war lords. every country has to find its own solution not america. don't support dictators and oppressive governments AMEN

  • Posted By: Justin9976 @ 12/02/2008 4:21:11 PM

    Hmmmm. Well, I'm not so sure we want to rely on warlords to keep Afghanistan from harboring terrorists. Seems to me that was exactly the situation prior to 9-11. That being said we are not in a position financially to have troops stationed all over the world policing the actions of other countries. We have over 700 overseas bases which to me reeks of imperialism. For one thing, we cannot afford it. When social security and medicare is added to the deficit numbers we're talking 60 trillion right now and spending an extra trillion a year for overseas bases is a waste of not only our resources but those of our children. Secondly, we talk about how these muslim extremists need to be stopped but what about the muslim extremists we're allied with? Do you really believe the Sauds are any different then Saddam, Pakistan or Afghanistan? I think we should get out of all these countries and leave them to their own devices. It's a simple fact that we need oil for our country to run, but does it really matter which corrupt dictatorship we trade with? I really don't see much of a difference between Saudi Arabia and the Iraq of 10 years ago. With the American military out of the middle east these countries will no longer have "the great satan" to blame for their problems and they will undoubtedly turn on each other and really who cares. Are mistake after 9-11 was not dealing with the true perpetrator of those events. The Taliban came from Pakistan and that's where the current enemy is located. We should have invaded Pakistan as well, killed Omar and Bin Laden and make our retribution strong enough that others would think twice before pulling the same kind of stunt again. Instead, we let Pakistan, our supposed ally control the border with Afghanistan. Shocking that Bin Laden got away. He was guided through the mountains with the assistance of the Pakistani military. I do think we open ourselves up to hatred across the globe with our military getting involved in places it really shouldn't, but that's not an excuse to murder 3000 Americans with no recourse. I hope Obama is serious about getting Bin Laden, but after that point I believe it's time to leave countries to their own devices. The argument that an isolationist policy didn't work during WWII is invalid. No country would attack the U.S. because of the simple fact we have thousands and thousands of nuclear weapons. We really don't need to have a military all over the globe. And the fact that we are allied with some of the worst countries who have no respect for basic human rights just points to the hypocrisy of our nation. We speak about freedom but condone the suppression of basic freedoms by countries with whom we believe we must have some sort of strategic alliance.

    • Posted By: DrZook @ 12/02/2008 6:33:56 PM

      An excellent post Justin! You are absolutely spot on dude! If you and others like you can persuade enough of your fellow citizens to move away from the paranoid, agressive foreign policies of the last five or six decades, I believe you could still save it. America was a great country once upon a time, founded upon the most noble principles. I see it now as yet another empire sliding into collapse.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse