Countless members of our military are dying overseas, and most of us do not even realize it.
The international conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq have been occurring since 2001 and 2003, respectively. Since then, the military has been running “advise and assist missions” where they hope, by helping train the Iraqi and Afghani forces, the Iraqi and Afghani people can defend their lands from insurgent groups such as Daesh and the Taliban. Advising these foreign armies are the US Special Forces, more commonly known as the Green Berets. For this mission, 17 servicemen have lost their lives in Afghanistan this year alone, with eight being Green Berets. These men are rarely mentioned by major news outlets, except in passing.
In 2019, the Pew Research Center surveyed Americans and found that 41 percent of Americans believe that Afghanistan is NOT worth fighting for. In comparison, 59 percent of Americans support using troops to combat extremism in Syria and Iraq against Daesh. The biggest motivating factor behind these numbers is how people compare costs to effectiveness. While in Iraq and Syria it is easy to see our militaries defeating Daesh, in Afghanistan, the progress is harder to find.
The Pew Research Center also researched how veterans felt about these wars and found that 64 percent of Iraq veterans and 58 percent of Afghanistan veterans do not believe that their conflicts were worth fighting. It has been 18 years of conflict, and there has not been enough success to justify it.
In the presidential races, the conflicts are barely mentioned. I follow many former military personnel on Twitter with one, Paul Rieckhoff, being the founder of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans Association (IAVA). During each of the Democratic debates, Mr. Reickhoff was disgusted at how Afghanistan is never mentioned. Finally, at the Houston debate, Afghanistan was brought up. Even then, many were not satisfied with how little the subject was discussed and the lack of clarity in plans for the future.
Most of the presidential candidates want to pull out of Afghanistan. While this is what people like Mr. Reickhoff want, the candidates want to do it through a “hard withdraw.” This means they want to leave suddenly with the nation in ruins, allowing the Taliban to gain power. Essentially, all the previous deaths would be for nothing in this scenario.
Presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren, when discussing the “hard withdraw,” brought up the idea of investing in economic and developmental opportunities instead of using the military. While the United States should invest in those areas, it will not stop the Taliban. The Taliban will still attack the democratic government and the people of Afghanistan and try to take over the nation. A hard withdraw would most likely lead to the collapse of Afghanistan into a civil war.
Other candidates did not discuss a definitive plan during the debate, opting instead to merely state that they will bring the troops home or tout about how they voted against the wars to begin with. These lack of plans surrounding Afghanistan are because the nation is not thought of enough by the American public. It has been pushed off to the side by our lawmakers and leaders. Think back to the last election you voted in, whether it be the 2018 midterms or the 2016 presidential elections. Did you know what the candidates’ stances on Afghanistan and Iraq were?
Mothers, fathers, sons, daughters and more are being deployed without knowing what they are fighting for. We have been in Afghanistan and Iraq for so long that some voters and military personnel were born after the conflict started. The time has come for the Forever Wars to be a part of public discourse again. Through public discourse, more accountability will be held to our lawmakers. More ideas for plans will come through, and a better plan will rise up so we can finally end the Forever Wars.
Until then, we will be asking, “what are we sending Americans to die for?”
