Afghanistan Hearts Trump

It’s almost as if one could foretell what the outcome would be weeks before the announcement was made – Trump would continue the failed policies of the previous administrations regarding Afghanistan. Apparently, the aptly named “swamp” that Trump vociferously claimed he would drain has drained him of any constancy with regards to policy promises. Maybe Steve Bannon wasn’t speaking hyperbolically when he stated that the Trump presidency many voted for was effectively “over”.

Yet this shouldn’t come as a surprise, being that politicians eagerly promise the moon to the electorate but end up giving their constituents coals and ashes. What is alarming are voters whom continue to place trust in these demagogues, even though the aforementioned deflating process repeats and has repeated itself for hundreds of years in Western democracies.

We are spending approximately $50 billion a year – more than Great Britain’s yearly defense budget – in Afghanistan. The territory has become more destabilized than it was when we first entered the place. The US has surrendered countless lives for the supposed sake of keeping the Taliban at bay for 16 years and yet it appears Trump will order a troop increase to the region. (I use the term “appears” because last night’s speech was rich in doublespeak and extremely vague on details.)

While neocons are justifying the move by claiming that leaving a vacuum in the region would create the conditions for the regrowth of ISIS or a similar caliphate, the truth is that there are more efficient and less mortal ways of curbing Islamic terror within the country. Firstly, cut off national funds (“foreign aid”, as the government calls it) to Afghanistan and surrounding countries like Pakistan which harbor, train and export terrorists. Secondly, leave only essential personnel within the country to monitor it and limit our military operations to airstrikes. Thirdly, begin to deport Muslims within the US, considering that it is their religion which is causing much, if not most, of the worldwide upheaval.

This last proposal will send social justice warriors into a melodramatic tizzy. However, I ask those who become indignant for the sake of sanctimony to ask themselves why US citizens are under the obligation to continually sacrifice their civil liberties for the sake of not offending Muslims on our soil. The cowardly politicians, which includes Trump at this point, and many average citizens are unwilling to come to terms with the fact that one of the two primary threats to domestic security, at the moment, is Mohammedanism (the other being different manifestations of Marxism/Leninism).

Hence, instead of directly signaling the culprits and demanding that they submit to the American ideal or risk being thrown out of and disallowed into the country for sedition, the government casts a wide surveillance dragnet and violates the privacy rights of innocent Americans in the process, treating them as if they are guilty parties that have to prove their innocence when it ought to be the other way around.

Think upon it, dear reader; what sensible home owner would indiscriminately permit a stranger into their household without properly vetting who will enter the door? What sane person would allow an avowed criminal or person who pledges allegiance to a homicidal ideology into their abode? Who, in their right mind, would seek to give financial “assistance” to their sworn enemies? Yet, all the contrary is true with respect to the United States and its feckless immigration and foreign policies.

We allow treasonous elements in and financially support enemies without. What’s worse, the mainstream media, the Democratic Party and large factions within the Republican Party are enabling and defending these policies, endangering the public in the process, under the ruses of “equality”, “tolerance” and “immigrant rights”.

With this latest decision, Trump has just imprinted his stamp of approval on all of the consequences of Bush’s and Obama’s erred policy. What happened to “America First”? It seems as if that doctrine has been replaced by “Special Interests and Political Correctness First”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s