A Trillion Dollars in Afghanistan… So How Did We Fix This?

On December 9, 2019, the Washington Post published documents detailing how for nearly two decades the US spent nearly a trillion dollars in Afghanistan (please note, this doesn’t include Iraq). So how do we fix this?

Let’s not use this piece to discuss current political fights on being unable to afford health care for all of us or why we cant relieve student debt or the current reduction to SNAP recipients.

Today we will look at talks that have gone on in the military since the conflict began. Once, Afghanistan was referred to as America’s forgotten war as Iraq stole the headlines. In the year 2004, I was preparing to be a military officer by 2006. The concern of classmates then was, “how can we lead and train troops who saw combat while we are only studying now and the wars would be done?” Little did we know…

Since the wars have gone on, the talk was always this isn’t a single war, but the explanation you would get in honest informal talk was these were 6, 9, 12, 15 or God forbid 18-month wars. Once a new unit came in, they had their way of doing operations and what was previously done would be forgotten. And if I’m being totally honest, I was guilty of it to. Whether in Iraq or Afghanistan, in both places I was apart of our predecessors are jacked up and our replacements don’t get it yet.

In combat, you have three fights. In simple terms, there is the tactical fight, the operational fight and the strategic fight. Tactically, force vs force and owning a geographical area, I bet on us any day. Even operationally, our military will is undeniable. Then you get to this thing called the strategic fight and this is where it gets murky.

So how do we fix this?

I had a Sergeant Major who I considered a teacher tell me to ask two questions; what’s next, and who needs to know? Tactically and operationally, this is not so difficult, but strategically, that is a bigger problem. Now, I ask you to match that problem with a military system that frowns if you say “I don’t know.” Imagine a system that your evaluations and career depends on producing results and showing gains towards a desired goal. Imagine leaders who are convinced beforehand they know the problem and answer (hint: it leads to cherry-picking data).

So how do we fix this?

In the military, we have this concept we call a self-licking ice cream cone. The data pulled can tell any story you want (and often a favorable progressing story is told); but in Afghanistan, nearing two decades and a trillion dollars, the story told is extremely complicated.

So how do we fix this?

Again, that’s complicated. We all know someone who served but really, only 1% of the population serves, so there is an extreme disconnect and lack of ownership and/or true investment.

Strategically, saying have one strategy and sticking to it sounds good, but in combat, variables are fluid and can change instantly, there is no one size fits all. You need to know your objective and accomplish this BEFORE variables change, BUT the enemy ALWAYS has a vote as does other regional and global actors.

So how do we fix this, and importantly, how do we prevent this you ask? It’ll take a nation as a whole. Not every war is Desert Shield/Desert Storm where ground operations are done in under 100 hours. That is part of the problem.

I want you to think back… When have you ever heard, “this war will be long, operations will be tough, we’re going to spend trillions and your kids not yet born will one day be fighting this same war.” The answer is never… we always here how it will be business as usual and the political proclamations made publicly are held up by the military and championed by the press.

So how do we fix this? Next time conflict arises, don’t cheerlead. Ask those tough questions to leaders and the press. If misled hold those leaders accountable, but also know if our leadership changes, that’s a variable change that also may affect our actions…. so I leave you with one question, so how do we fix this?

Similar Read: Diplomacy and War: Know the Difference

War Taxes and Other Radical Ideas From the Left

Joe Biden is the clear front runner in the Democratic race for the presidential nomination. Regardless of his tone-deaf comments and self-inflicting blunders, his poll numbers haven’t wavered and the race is his to lose. With that being said, nearly every Democrat trailing him is willing to say and do anything to gain traction, including radical ideas and “sound good” policy.

Bernie Sanders, who is second in most polls, just proposed cutting student loan debt, all $1.6 TRILLION. It sounds good, but unrealistic by any measure and a weak attempt to gain traction. Student loan debt can be crippling, and maybe that’s why so many people have quickly jumped on the Bernie bandwagon after he made the announcement… some probably knowing it sounds too good to be true, and others really believing it could happen (if he wins of course). Let’s just say we defer to the former.

If that wasn’t a stretch goal, last week Beto O’Rourke proposed a “war tax”, which would require non-military households (so roughly 99% of the population) to pay a “war tax” to help cover the health care of veterans of newly-authorized wars. Healthcare for veterans, including mental health and other related services for them and their families, should be a primary concern of every White House administration. We can safely say both parties have dropped this ball. But more taxes to address this issue isn’t the answer, and if Beto didn’t know that before his announcement, Twitter quickly confirmed that it’s a nonstarter. While the taxes would be nominal, it’s still a bad idea thrown at an even worse problem.

Household income…

  • Making less than $30,000/year would pay $25
  • Making less than $40,000/year would pay $57
  • Making less than $50,000/year would pay $98
  • Making less than $75,000/year would pay $164
  • Making less than $100,000/year would pay $270
  • Making less than $200,000/year would pay $485
  • Making more than $200,000/year would pay $1,000.

Just a thought… Considering we budget more for our military than the next 7 countries combined, why don’t we start by allocating a small percentage of that to veterans healthcare? I think we’ll have enough… to still say we budget more for our military than the next 7 countries combined.