Once again Afghanistan is in the news.  A New York Times story alleges that the Russians, under Vladimir Putin, put bounties on the heads of American troops in that forsaken nation.  The Taliban, according to the information leaked to the Times, would get the money when U. S. troops were attacked and some killed.

            Denials were quick to come, from the Administration, which claimed that the President and key figures in his immediate circle, were never briefed about this bombshell of a revelation.  The Russians denied ever doing this, of course, even though it would fit into their world view.  Taliban spokesmen claimed it never happened, for when they attacked the U. S. troops they did so with their own resources.  And they claim the “deal” with the Americans prevent them from engaging in such an activity.

            Where is the truth in all of this?  We can probably never know until there is some independent verification of the intelligence from which it was gleaned.  Is it possible?  Yes, for the Russians have shown, under Putin, the proclivities to cause havoc in places outside their borders (see Ukraine as an example).  But there is not enough information to verify the claim that it did happen as the Times asserts.

            But what this story does do is to highlight again the failed attempt by American leaders to force Afghanistan into becoming a peaceful, productive member of the international community.  We have been involved in that county for almost 20 years now, and have accomplished very little, if anything, positive.

            We got into this conflict under President George W. Bush, in an attempt to punish those who harbored the terrorists who plotted and carried out the attacks on the World Trade Center in September 2001.  More troops were sent there under President Barack Obama, in an attempt to pacify the land.  Only under President Donald Trump have we begun to draw down the numbers, and the deal with the Taliban was negotiated.

            But Afghanistan has never been able to be controlled by those who have attempted to do so.  From Alexander the Great, to Great Britain, to the Soviet Union and now the United States, no amount of military action or money spent has pacified the Afghan nation.

            What have we accomplished in our efforts there?  We have expended billions of dollars on these campaigns, lost thousands of soldiers killed (2310 according to the DOD) and many more injured, and still the campaign goes on.

            This is the third time I have written about this debacle, and it seems that our leaders still have no idea what constitutes success in Afghanistan.  We must hold those who preside over our foreign policy to account.  Ask questions of those who hold the reins of power:  why are we still in that country?  What is thr ultimate goal of our policy?  What will show us we have succeeded in our military efforts?  What is the end game for us?  Ultimately, what is the benefit of our being in that place to us as a nation?  Have our leaders even come close to answering that most central question?  If not, why still be there?

            If these questions cannot be answered to our satisfaction, then we, the voters, must demand our troops be brought home.  Perhaps we should take the advice of those, who, during the Vietnam War, suggested we simply declare victory and quit the battlefield.  What have we got to lose?  If the Afghans wish to fight each other, let them.  Their problems are not an existential threat to America.  Why spend another life or dollar on them?