3-Star General Who Helped Lead War On Terror: We’ve Lost the Wars In Iraq and Afghanistan

“That Would Be Four Times Biting That Poison Apple: Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq and Then Iraq Again”

3-star General Daniel Bolger helped to lead the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The first sentence of his new book – Why We Lost: A General’s Inside Account of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars – starts:

I am a United Sates Army general, and I lost the Global War on Terrorism. It’s like Alcoholics Anonymous; step one is admitting you have a problem. Well, I have a problem. So do my peers. And thanks to our problem, now all of America has a problem, to wit: two lost campaigns and a war gone awry.

Yahoo News notes:

Having studied military history, he says he should have known that a U.S.-led counterinsurgency in a country like Afghanistan could never work.

Now, with the rise of the Islamic State, there’s a growing choir urging the U.S. military to lead yet another ground war in Iraq.

“That would be four times biting that poison apple: Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq and then Iraq again,” he said.

General Bolger is right.

The U.S. previously carried out regime change in Iraq in 1963 and Afghanistan in the 1970s.

Empire after empire has broken its back trying to control Afghanistan.   “One more surge” won’t do the trick.

War has bankrupted empires for 2,500 years. America is  no different. Especially when countries go into debt to finance the war … instead of paying for it out of current finances.

America has fallen into the same trap … and is digging an ever-deeper hole.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
This entry was posted in Politics / World News. Bookmark the permalink.
  • truth

    The fall of the American Empire will happen, so we may as well sit back and enjoy the show. I’ll sit on my future dilapidated porch telling grandkids how the Empire I was born into finally destroyed itself.

  • Voice of Reason

    It is good to see patriots in the US military breaking ranks with the Wall Street / Washington military industrial complex. It would appear that soldiers like Gen. Bolger are beginning to take seriously their oath to defend the country and realize that can’t be done by defending a bankrupt currency in far off lands. Since the end of WWII US foreign policy makers seem to have believed that tolerating even the slightest opposition to the dictates of Washington and US banks would undermine their ability to buy up and control the world with debt created on the books of US banks and on Wall Street.

    Professional military men like Gen. Bolger have been quiet far too long. They have sat by passively watching the sources of national power, the nation’s factories and the professional skills of its people, off-shored to fatten the bank accounts of multinational CEOs and stockholders. They have watched as the nation burned up the petroleum reserves that are STILL a basic requirement for victory in a conventional war.

    We have listened to the blathering of corrupt politicians bought and paid for by Wall Street and the banks far too long. Let us hope more people like Gen. Bolger who understand both the foundation and limitations of national power will step forward. Let us hope it is not too late to salvage what remains of the greatness and prosperity for which previous generations of Americans have sacrificed so much.

  • Mark Williford

    He is only repeating what Napoleon, Jefferson, Madison, Lincoln and Eisenhower all understood. It’s all about central banker’s motivation to lend government’s fiat currency to create perpetual wars for perpetual indebtedness. Please go read Carol Quigley’s (Georgetown professor and former mentor to George Casey and Bill Clinton) book, “Tragedy and Hope” and Gary Allen’s classic “None Dare Call it Conspiracy,” to understand the war riddles Orwell left us.

    • Voice of Reason

      Check this out…
      “So that it comes about that by far the great part of what the modern world regards as wealth, and what is a perennial source of wealth to individuals, is not wealth but a consequence of lending or having lent wealth, and is in fact a form of national or communal debt. The intense competition for foreign or overseas markets in time of peace, aggravated by the home market
      drying up through the loss of purchasing power of the unemployed, is not due to any altruistic or missionary spirit of the industrialised nations in wishing to unload of their abundance for the enrichment of the newer and less industrialised nations, but to the necessity of finding new debtors, with good future prospects of being able to pay interest, to whom to lend their wealth.

      The modern wars that break out between industrialised nations have a precisely parallel explanation. Then the belligerent nations rather than individuals shoulder the debt. The glut of wealth, that in time of peace cannot be profitably exchanged, is now owed for as it is produced by the nations as such Along with the flower of the country’s manhood, it is destroyed as
      rapidly as the most powerful modern engines of destruction allow. The dead do not
      return, but the wealth destroyed discards its corruptible body to take on an incorruptible. It is national debt, better than wealth to individuals, a permanent source of wealth, defying the
      passage of time and the ravages of rats and worms.”

      MONEY versus MAN: A STATEMENT OF THE WORLD PROBLEM FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE NEW ECONOMICS

      FREDERICK SODDY, London : E. Mathews &
      Marrot, 1931, pp. 27-28

  • Greg Burton

    Retreat from Kabul: If Alexander the Great, the English, the Soviets couldn’t do it, why in the hell did the US think it could do it? The answer: post 9/11 (inside job) blood-lust. We were tricked into creating somebody else’s empire.