By coincidence, I was reading a “Military History” magazine story headlined “Indomitable Afghanistan” the same day that the impending end of Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s military career—considering President Barack Obama’s ego, there was never any doubt he would fire McChrystal—broke into the news.

The story told in the “Military History” article underscored a reason for the growing feeling that we face a virtually impossible task in Afghanistan. 

Our motives are better by far than those of previous invaders, but I believe the majority of Americans believe that we can’t succeed in establishing a significantly less corrupt central government and either eradicate or neutralize the Talibans and their ruthless leadership. 

(Speaking of Afghanistan’s central government, a Wall Street Journal story Monday reported that more than $3 billion in cash has been flown out of Kabul in the past three years in what U.S. investigators see as top Afghan officials sending diverted U.S. aid and other funds to financial safe havens abroad.)

Two paragraphs in the “Military History” article seem to me to summarize the task which the United States faces, no matter how worthy our motives.  One paragraph reads:

“The list of foreign powers the Afghans have thwarted is long and impressive, stretching from the world’s first super power, the Persian Empire, to its latest, the United States.  In between, failed would-be conquerors have included Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Victoria’s Great Britain and the Soviet Union—and many others.”

The second particularly pertinent paragraph quoted an elderly tribal leader’s response when a British diplomat tried to convince him of the benefits of a firm central government:  “We are content with discord, we are content with alarms, we are content with blood.  But we will never be content with a master.”

Pakistanis Are Not Reliable Allies

What about the supposedly most important objective of the current invasion of Afghanistan—elimination of al Qaeda terrorist training camps and operations bases along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border?  There have been reports of some success in this aspect of our efforts in Afghanistan but very dim prospects of long-term results if we withdraw our troops.  This is especially true in view of the fact that the Pakistanis are such unreliable allies of the United States.

McChrystal’s regrettable mistake—submitting to an interview with a notoriously left-wing publication like Rolling Stone—didn’t alter the basic fact that he was trying hard to carry out President Obama’s assignment to make significant progress towards what a good many experts see as Obama’s unattainable goals, and doing so by July 1, 2011.

Some impressive sources said Obama made the wrong decision in replacing McChrystal, even with such a respected commander as Gen. David Petraeus.  Critics of Obama’s decision included Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, respected CNN political commentator David Gergen, the liberal Washington Post and Tom Gouttierre, longtime director of the Center for Afghanistan Studies at the University of Nebraska at Omaha and an internationally recognized expert on Afghanistan.

Understandably, by focusing attention on an unpopular war, Obama’s decision created increased sentiment for promptly initiating a policy of orderly withdrawal from Afghanistan.  Thomas L. Friedman, most respected of The New York Times stable of liberal columnists, said Obama hadn’t been able to answer basic questions about what we are trying to achieve in Afghanistan.  Friedman’s column then concluded:

“When the president can’t answer the simplest questions, it’s a sign that you’re somewhere you don’t want to be and your only real choices are lose early, lose late, lose big or lose small.”

* * *

I Rooted For The United States Team
But Ghana’s Win Seems Appropriate

What was your reaction to the United States soccer team losing to Ghana, 2-1, in the “Sweet Sixteen” championship showdown round in the World Cup competition?

My feeling is certainly not total disappointment.  While I was rooting for the U.S. team, I thought the result was rather appropriate in that Ghana was the sole surviving African representative in a World Cup tournament which started out with six African countries competing and was being held in Africa for the first time.

A headline in an African newspaper the day before the U.S.-Ghana match read:  “Ghana, Do It For Africa!”

A Denver Post columnist’s reaction was almost 180 degrees different from mine.  Columnist Mark Kiszla wrote: 

“Until defeat tastes like dirt and anything less than winning it all is unacceptable, the United States is doomed to dig the ball from the back of their net at the World Cup.”

Come on, Mr. Columnist.  Soccer may be becoming more popular in this country, but it isn’t in the same league with a number of other sports except every four years at World Cup time.

* * *

President—And The Congress—Should Be Held
To Deficit-Reduction Pledge Made In Toronto

Now if President Obama will just keep the word he gave at the Toronto meeting of 20 countries which represent the bulk of the world’s economic power.

Our president went to Toronto with the announced intention of attempting to persuade some countries—particularly those in Europe—to cut back their plans to reduce spending and thereby cut their annual deficits. 

The European nations’ plans were described as a turn away from welfare state deficit spending in an effort to avoid accumulating a national debt so large that it could cause economic disaster.

Obama indicated his intention was to attempt to persuade such countries that continued deficit spending, increasing national debt, was necessary to provide economic stimulus to overcome the current economic recession.

But the clear prevailing sentiment in Toronto was to curb welfare state deficit spending.

A New York Times story said that at the Toronto meeting President Obama indicated that he will “go along with other leaders who are more concerned about rising debt and join in a commitment to cut their governments’ deficits in half by 2013.”

We shall see, we shall see.  But Americans should fervently hope that if the president gave such a commitment—or even implied such a commitment—to other world leaders meeting in Toronto, he will keep his word.

Members of Congress, of course, have the final word.  Let’s hope they, too, took seriously the message from Toronto.

* * *

Cover Your Ears And Keep Dogs Inside;
Fourth Of July Fireworks Will Be Louder

You can thank the Nebraska Legislature if you and your dogs find the Fourth of July fireworks fusillade even louder this year.

The types of fireworks that can be sold in Nebraska have been expanded, and you’ll be hearing the first reports soon.

The Legislature also legalized fireworks during a three-day celebration of New Year’s Day.  Why stop at New Year’s Day?  Martin Luther King Day?  April Fool’s Day (appropriate for those foolish enough to take risks with supposedly “safe and sane” fireworks), Memorial Day, etc., etc.

More seriously, since children and their tolerant fathers in too many cases seem committed to the idea that the more fireworks, the better, a suggestion for fathers: 

Study up on the history of the American Revolution and the lives of the men who pledged to each other “our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor” in the cause of freedom when they signed the Declaration of Independence.  If you are bound and determined that you and your children must celebrate the 4th of July with fireworks, the least you can do is understand and relate to those children the true significance of what we celebrate.

And, further, resist the “Daddy, let me, Daddy, let me” pleas when your good sense tells you that the child involved is too young to be trusted to ignite a skyrocket or whatever.

* * *

Conference Hopes Huskers Will Expand
Big Ten Television Network ‘Footprint’

Little by little, we are learning more about the much-hyped sports television Big 10 Network—“BTN” for short—that has been offered as a principal non-academic reason for the University of Nebraska-Lincoln to join the Big 10 conference.

If you read far enough into another of the long enthusiastic newspaper accounts of the supposed advantages of UNL joining the Big 10, you would have learned that the BTN is a relatively modest operation.

For one thing, its “footprint” is not nationwide.  (In this connection, it is hoped that Nebraska’s dedicated fans will help expand the BTN’s eight-state broadcast area.)

Reading into that long newspaper article, you would also have learned that of the more than $21 million distributed to each Big 10 school in annual profits from sports telecasts, the BTN contributed less than half—between $7 million and $8 million.

Most of the Big 10’s telecast revenue comes through deals with ABC and ESPN, deals which don’t depend on the Big 10 television network.

Isn’t it about time to end the hype of what appears to be a good deal for UNL both financially and academically and let the facts play out for themselves, presumably in a considerably longer timeframe than might be suggested by some of the hyperbole in the news media and by some of the optimistic projections of University of Nebraska officials?

* * *

‘Soccer May Open The Door To Romance’

To end on lighter—and more sensible—comments than those I quoted earlier from a Denver Post columnist, consider this from a fellow Post columnist, John Meyer:

Young American males might do well to become more interested in the “beautiful game” of soccer: 

A whole generation of women is growing up with a history of having played soccer in high school and perhaps in college and “love the game,” Meyer wrote, so showing an interest in soccer might be the way to a young woman’s heart.

The columnist didn’t make clear whether the young male needs to be really interested in soccer or just has to pretend he is.

# # #