Build, Don't Destroy in Afghanistan: An Open Letter to President Obama

Some would assume that, because I wear a uniform and I served with the military in Afghanistan, I couldn't possibly understand, value or support Sojo's recommendations. They would be wrong.

I am also a Christian who believes that we should always strive first and foremost for peace. I agree humanitarian aid is most desirable and will do the most good in Afghanistan. In fact, I fight for Sojo's right to embrace and enlighten others about pacifism and the pursuit of social justice for all.

However, it's a fine line that those of us walk who volunteer to protect and defend the human rights of the poor and oppressed. The best I can say is that, having seen the evil of terrorists up close while in Afghanistan, and having watched with horror as the events of 9/11 unfolded, I'm confident that without strong, vigilant security, humanitarian aid will never reach the people who need it so desperately.

I'm reminded of the nuns in Central America who, while working on behalf of the poor, were murdered in cold blood by paramilitary groups. Nuns aren't the only aid workers at risk in Afghanistan. The Taliban have proven that they're willing to kill anyone peacefully working toward educating or otherwise assisting Afghanistan's poor.

Unfortunately, troops are necessary to protect those who serve in humanitarian roles, to ensure that aid work is possible and the wellbeing of each aid worker is secure. Otherwise, those who seem interested in simply removing the military from the Afghanistan equation will need to consider the cost of lost innocent lives in their "war savings" calculations. As Christians, that terrible cost should keep us all up at night.

The Bible tells us that Joshua went into the promised land, with singers praising God and making music. And as he journeyed, he was accompanied by a large group of Soldiers, with swords at the ready for protection.

Similarly, we cannot expect vulnerable non-military personnel to work in any area where their lives are threatened unless we take the necessary steps to keep those who do the most good from being most at risk.

Jeff Courter
http://LifeLoveandTruth.com

My father-in-law, a retired pastor, forwarded this essay to me. I am posting my response, and-more to the point-its question, as a comment here to see what other make of it; can add to this converation:

Morning Dad,

Aren't Wallis's thoughts similar to Kristof's subject for his opinion piece a few weeks back? Charity does seem to function as a moral door for framing thoughts about peace in our society. Anyway, it is an approach to 'peace' that is marketable; a 'peace' that preaches; a piety that effects an entombing, whitewashed piety.

It is a piety defined by a talk not walked.

The systemic usury that creates 'wealth' in our iteration of global capitalism (based on fiat currencies denominated in consumer debt) traps us in this piety. When one's 'money' is coined in debt-a debt that was justified by (and dependent on) economic exploitation, social inequality, and environmental destruction-every exchange of a Federal Reserve Note is a vote for injustice, self-interest, and an exercise in moral hubris-and this includes charitable giving. It may not feel like this is so, but such is the spiritual blindness that piety can effect through the dynamics of motivated reasoning.

To figure this out, I have found it helpful to recall that 'charity,' as the term meant when agape was translated into the vernacular, is God's love. However, I feel we have corrupted the meaning of 'charity,' just as we have changed our thinking about the terms 'faith" (now belief), and 'hope' (now wishing). Charity, due to a systemic failure to be about doing justice, now means enslaving.

From the logic of this framing, Wallis' argument affects a clanging gong . . . and proves Paul correct in the logic of his exegesis on these three things-of which, the greatest, is charity. What is flawed in this theological argument, other than it feels harsh?

=)
Greg

My father-in-law, a retired pastor, forwarded this essay to me. I am posting my response, and-more to the point-its question, as a comment here to see what other make of it; can add to this converation:

Morning Dad,

Aren't Wallis's thoughts similar to Kristof's subject for his opinion piece a few weeks back? Charity does seem to function as a moral door for framing thoughts about peace in our society. Anyway, it is an approach to 'peace' that is marketable; a 'peace' that preaches; a piety that effects an entombing, whitewashed piety.

It is a piety defined by a talk not walked.

The systemic usury that creates 'wealth' in our iteration of global capitalism (based on fiat currencies denominated in consumer debt) traps us in this piety. When one's 'money' is coined in debt-a debt that was justified by (and dependent on) economic exploitation, social inequality, and environmental destruction-every exchange of a Federal Reserve Note is a vote for injustice, self-interest, and an exercise in moral hubris-and this includes charitable giving. It may not feel like this is so, but such is the spiritual blindness that piety can effect through the dynamics of motivated reasoning.

To figure this out, I have found it helpful to recall that 'charity,' as the term meant when agape was translated into the vernacular, is God's love. However, I feel we have corrupted the meaning of 'charity,' just as we have changed our thinking about the terms 'faith" (now belief), and 'hope' (now wishing). Charity, due to a systemic failure to be about doing justice, now means enslaving.

From the logic of this framing, Wallis' argument affects a clanging gong . . . and proves Paul correct in the logic of his exegesis on these three things-of which, the greatest, is charity. What is flawed in this theological argument, other than it feels harsh?

=)
Greg

Nicely done, very impressive. Keep up the good work and of course, keep sharing your ideas.

I often read your blog and always find it very interesting. Thought it was about time i let you know?Keep up the great work

Great job. I doubt Obama will listen, though.

Cayenne Pepper

Quite honestly, I think the war in Afghanistan and Iraq is always going to be lost. The Muslim extremists there are just too, well, extreme. I truly admire those who are involved in giving service to the afflicted there. Those who are with faith-based and secular organizations doing relief and development work are as much heroes as those who are there as military or military contractors. God bless you them for that.

I also have to say I think the term "humanitarian and development surge" is genius. It has certainly worked historically. Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi believed that civil disobedience and basic decency was enough to change a society -- even if it's slow. I too agree with the statement, "We believe that after eight years of war we need a whole new approach in Afghanistan." That is the fundamental issue, isn't it? It is.

Great letter. Hopefully Obama read it.

GR
Nutritional Supplement | Bee Pollen | Colon Cleanse | Lowering Cholesterol | Natural Migraine Headache Cure | Hemorrhoid Cure Secrets | Fish Oil | Panic Attack | One Cup Coffee Maker

Great stuff dude.. I was really impressed.

thanks for sharing with us.

Nicely done, very impressive. Keep up the good work and of course, keep sharing your ideas.

Great job. I doubt Obama will listen, though.

Cayenne Pepper

Thank you, it is very good! I like it very much

You are ignoring quite a bit in proposing that the US Military occupation of Afghanistan is a heroic intervention to protect Afghans and preserve the Afghans from terror or abuse. Many Afghans, US and international military experts, journalists and human rights workers testify to a much more compromised and dangerous escalation of violence and securing of a system of warlord fiefdoms who traffic in large quantities of opium and heroin with impunity. The "government of Afghanistan is deeply involved in this drug traffic and has not protected its people nor provided economic equity or the rule of law. This arrangement of a war relying on a corrupt client state failed in Vietnam and I remember many of the same things you are saying , being said then.
Your example of the nuns is oddly telling because the people that killed them were trained in America in the " counter insurgency" techniques of that time..
As for the claims of protection, in 8 years 2000 Taliban have been killed and more than 8000 civilians.Of those, between 2,700 and 3,000 Afghan civilians have been killed in US bombing attacks( Professor Marc Herold) .

While I see nothing admirable in the Taliban, it is important to recall that they are largely our creation, brought to power as the Mujahadeen in our proxy war with Russia.

You are not Joshua going into the promised land, you are a soldier who is part of a military occupation which is not accomplishing the mission you describe. According to the courageous Malalai Joya, Karzai and the warlords are corrupt and violent and often on friendly terms with the Taliban. She also says that women are not safe under the warlords or the Government either, and that the elections were a sham of people too frightened to vote and votes miscounted.

Great stuff dude.. I was really impressed.

thanks for sharing with us.

Mbt shoes will bring you a unique walk experience. Have a try to buy a pair of Mbt m walk and Mbt Chapa on the internet.

Nicely done, very impressive. Keep up the good work and of course, keep sharing your ideas.

thanks for sharing with us.

This is a great job! Well done. Thank you sharing your ideas and knowledge.

I will bookmark and continue reading your blog in the future! Thanks alot for the informative post!

thanks for sharing with us.

This is a great job! Well done. Thank you sharing your ideas and knowledge.

This is a great job! Well done. Thank you sharing your ideas and knowledge.

this is telly awesome article.Thanks for sharing with us..