Matthew Hoh did a Washington Post Q-n-A. He takes a lot of critiques of his let’s-get-out-of-Afghanistan position, which I don’t endorse, and answers them intelligently and honestly. We should all be able to argue as respectfully as this.
This, however, struck me as a wise thing to say.
Washington, D.C.: Not worth the fight? Have you forgotten about 9/11 and the failed state that existed before we entered Afghanistan? Do you want to give all we have accomplished, removing the Taliban from power, taking away al-Qaeda’s safe haven, making it possible for women to get an education, etc., back to the Muslim extremists? Isn’t that letting them win?
Matthew Hoh: I disagree and I think it is emotional arguments like this that keep us tied to Afghanistan and to a policy that fuels the insurgency as well as adds credence to calls for global Islamic jihad. 9/11 was a tragedy for this country and we cannot let another event like that happen, particularly as we have still not recovered from the emotional shock of the event 8 years later. Additionally, events like 9/11 cause tremendous shock to world financial markets, something we cannot allow to occur, especially at this point in time. However, since 9/11 al-Qaeda has evolved and no longer will tie itself to a political state or geographical boundaries.
9/11 is, of course, the reason we care about al-Qaeda. But it cannot and must not be used as an excuse for abandoning critical thinking. A superman, that Hoh.
Login Here




9 Comments
Spotlight


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
Advanced search
RSS/XML Feed
What? You called a Villager in good standing a Hoh? Boy, are you in trouble now — Steny Hoyer will shake his finger at you!
Thomas Ricks seemed to imply yesterday that this is a non-story. That the loss of Matthew Hoh means the Kabul embassy will need to find someone else to fetch coffee and run the copy machine. If that’s the case a lot of people went to a lot of trouble to keep him on board.
What? Why, I did nothing of the sort…
…
BWAHAHAHAHAHA
To be super-cynical, do you think this is a career starter for Hoh?
marc, I was interested in Ricks’ take as well. Can you point to where you read/heard that?
Hoh is plainly a powerful writer, and his experience in Afghanistan is not to be dismissed. It’s also fair to keep in mind what and who he is and isn’t, however. However uncharitable it might be this comment via Exum on the original WaPo report provides important context in my view. If the facts given are correct, Hoh was boots-down for four months. Do we credit a resignation-in-protest after four months? Is that enough time to credibly attempt to change policy from within — the obligation I thought was associated with a justified resignation in protest of a policy? He was clearly offered the opportunity to do just that, though I grant him his expectation that the 180-degree reversal he became convinced is necessary would not have been in his power to bring about. Is a full about-face on a war it campaigned on resourcing and bringing to a successful conclusion a reasonable thing to expect a new administration to complete in its its first year? Especially when you yourself signed on to work on that policy less than that year hence yourself? Did he expect administration thinking to track his perfectly? And if it doesn’t, is resignation then justified in under a year? I have a hard time understanding how people are taking the resignation part of this seriously, though the letter is clearly argued with passion and impeccable logic. I hope Captain Hoh was equally unrestrained in his communication of his views to his superiors and others who would listen internally for a sustained period (again: it couldn’t have been all that long that he tried) before concluding a resignation was necessary. I wonder whether an op-ed outlining these views as a preliminary step to resignation might have been a reasonable able step to expect of him. I suspect the administration would have been glad to okay that as a way to avoid or delay a public resignation.
Ricks was a guest on NPR’s Diane Rehm show Tuesday.
http://wamu.org/programs/dr/
Many thanks!
In all seriousness: I agree with you, he is indeed a high-class guy, whether or not one agrees with him.