An Evil Rationalization on Afghanistan by Jacob G. Hornberger!
(2021-09-16 at 00:05:52 )

An Evil Rationalization on Afghanistan by Jacob G. Hornberger!

One of the arguments that interventionists, including many United States military veterans, use to rationalize the United States defeat in Afghanistan is that United States forces were fighting to bring "freedom, democracy, and womens rights" to the country. In fact, the Pentagon even coined the term "Operation Enduring Freedom" as one of the ways to justify the invasion and occupation of the country. Even though the effort failed, the argument goes, interventionists, including veterans, should nonetheless feel good about their "service" to both the United States of America and Afghanistan.

There is a problem with this rationale and justification, however. The problem is that it is evil to the core.

In any invasion and occupation, there are inevitably going to be people killed, injured, and maimed. There is also going to be destruction of homes, business, and infrastructure. That certainly proved to be the case in Afghanistan.

Therefore, what interventionists were - and are - saying is that all those deaths, injuries, and property destruction were worth bringing freedom, democracy, and womens rights to Afghanistan.

But who died and made these people the arbiters of that type of mathematical life-and-death calculation????

After all, those who were killed in the process would never have experienced freedom, democracy, and womens rights.

That is because they would be dead.

Now, it is one thing for the citizens of a country to decide for themselves whether to revolt against the tyranny of their own government.

Violent revolutions can be very costly in terms of life and property.

That is why people might decide to put up with a lot of tyranny before they revolt.

They do not want to lose their family members, friends, and countrymen by revolting, until the situation gets so bad that they feel that they have no choice but to do so. In the final analysis, the decision to revolt and when to revolt can be highly subjective.

But that is a far cry from United States officials making that decision from afar.

Their decision is a cavalier one because they do not put the same value on Afghan life that the Afghan people do.

In fact, interventionists put little or no value on Afghan life.

That mindset is reflected by the fact that early in the invasion and occupation, the Pentagon, with the full support of Washington, D.C., officials, made the conscious decision to not even keep track of how many Afghans they were killing.

Moreover, there was never an upward limit on the number of Afghan people who could be killed, injured or maimed in the effort to bring freedom, democracy, and womens rights to the country.

It just did not matter.

Any number of Afghan people killed in the effort would be considered worth it by United States interventionists.

That is why the purported concern that United States interventionists, including many United States military veterans, express for the Afghan people rings hollow, given that they were willing to kill or maim any number of Afghans to reach their political goal.

How many Afghan lives were worth the United States effort to bring "freedom, democracy, and womens rights" to Afghanistan???

None!!

It was never morally or religiously justified for the United States government to kill even one single Afghan citizen for the sake of a political goal.

Killing, injuring, or maiming even just one single Afghan, much less tens of thousands of Afghans, for the sake of "freedom, democracy, and womens rights" has always been the epitome of evil.

Reprinted here with permission from Mr. Jacob G. Hornberger of The Future of Freedom Foundation!! Their Libertarian Website!!