College Media Network - Search the largest news resource for college students by college students Jobs and internships for students -

A prayer for charity

Published: Monday, October 26, 2009

Updated: Monday, October 26, 2009 03:10

She called the other night and, for the first time, I did not know what to say to her.
I met my best friend, Charity, 12 years ago when she moved next door to me from a military base in Hawaii.


When we were only 20, she told me she was pregnant with her first child, and she was scared and unsure what to do. But she did know what to do.


From me, she needed a friend to listen to her fears and her uncertainty, precisely the things I needed from her when I told her I was gay.


Late this summer, as Afghanistan entered its deadliest months since the 2001 invasion, Charity sat at a military base in upstate New York, waiting for news from her husband.


Charity called me to tell me two men in Phillip’s unit were killed when an improvised explosive device, an IED, detonated in Nerkh Valley, Afghanistan.


Terrified for her husband and devastated by the deaths of two men who were friends with Phillip, her voice trembled; she had only spoken with Philip for a few brief moments and knew little of his whereabouts or his safety.


I knew not one word of comfort Charity would not see through. I had no lies to weave, no “well, at least he’s safe now” or “I’m sure he will be OK” to tell my dear friend because each statement would ring hollow and false.


The time has come to end this disastrous war in Afghanistan. Eight years on, our presence there emboldens our enemies, makes little fiscal or strategic sense and weakens our national security.


Recently, Dick Cheney accused President Obama of making America less safe, suggesting Obama is “dithering” in his decision of whether to send 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan.


Offering a response to Cheney on ABC’s “This Week,” conservative columnist George Will said, “A bit of dithering might have been in order before we went into Iraq in pursuit of non-existent weapons of mass destruction.


“For a representative of the Bush administration to accuse someone of taking too much time is missing the point. We have much more to fear in this town from hasty than from slow government action.”


What we have to fear are the people who mislead and rushed us into a war in Iraq, warning such a war would prevent an impending 9/11 redux, leading us off an Afghanistan cliff with no end in sight.


Sen. John McCain argued for an Iraq invasion nearly six months before the Bush administration and repeated the incredible lie that Saddam Hussein had ties to al-Qaeda and the 9/11.


Today, McCain sings a familiar tune, warning in an op-ed with Sen. Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman of the consequences if Obama does not send 40,000 more troops immediately.


“The U.S. walked away from Afghanistan once before, following the Soviet collapse,” the senators write. “The result was 9/11. We must not make that mistake again.”


The real mistake is to listen to these men or anyone else who suggested we walk away from Afghanistan and into Iraq.


Afghanistan is no longer the war of necessity Obama defined it as this spring. That country’s presidential election this summer saw massive voter fraud with nearly one million ballots discounted. Afghan President Hamid Karzai promised this weekend that a runoff election would “be better than the first round.”


That assumes the U.S. government can trust Karzai and that he had nothing to do with the fraud this summer.


Obama can send as many troops as he wants but if we do not have a trusted government to work with there, then what are our soldiers fighting for?


What Phillip is fighting for? A corrupt government deeply invested and connected to that country’s opium production that directly funds the Taliban and al-Qaeda?


And what of al-Qaeda?


Our intelligence reports state fewer than 100 al-Qaida are in Afghanistan. Vice President Biden noted in a discussion with the president and his national security advisers that we spend $30 in Afghanistan for every dollar we spend in Pakistan. “So I have a question,” Biden asked. “Al-Qaeda is almost all in Pakistan, and Pakistan has nuclear weapons.”


As Biden asked, “Does that make strategic sense?”


Does it make sense to bring our troop total to 100,000 when Gen. Petraeus’ own projections suggest it would take 20-25 troops per 1,000 Afghan residents (640,000 for a population of 32 million) to pacify that country?


No and neither does asking our brave soldiers to carry out such a disastrous policy.


$824 billion and eight years later, the time has come to put an end to this silliness. History tells tales of other countries getting mired in Afghanistan, the unconquerable country.


This column is for Charity and Phillip, for all our soldiers who fight without hesitation. This is the best I can do for them.

James is an M.A. student in screen studies and English. He received his B.A. in film studies and political science from the University of Oklahoma.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

14 comments

b.j.
Wed Oct 28 2009 21:45
yes/ someone is finally talking about the toll this war is taking on the american family.the stress of not knowing if your loved one is coming home alive or in a body bag.this war should not have been except for bush and his pals and there need to prove they were the super power. you know what they say only fools rush in where wise men dare not go.good job james.
Your name
Wed Oct 28 2009 17:10
james your friendship and love for your friend charity shows in this article.continue to be there for her because she needs you at this time. sometimes when we can not find words to comfort another just being there to listen will help. i know she is scared for her husband and he can only try to assure her he will be alright.we need to stop this war .and bring our men and women home. may god be with you as you try to be there for your friend and thanks for writing such a moving article.
Megan-- Phillip's Little Sister
Wed Oct 28 2009 15:16
James I am glad you wrote this article.. opinion piece or not I thought it was great.

I am Phillip's little sister Megan, and I can appreicate your letter to Charity. I think some of my fellow readers missed the purpose of this article, and that is fine, we are all entitled to our opinions. But I say continue to be there for Charity and my nieces, and if writing a letter/article is your way of expressing yourself and how you feel about a war that has taken the lives of so many. Then do so I will read them. :-)

Bandwagon Patriot
Wed Oct 28 2009 15:04
Your reading comprehension is terrible. It was the United States, not the Taliban, that wasn't serious about the whole thing. Please try reading again, instead of posting.

Also, ironically, the US engages in both terrorism and genocide, so you're still making an argument against America.

Aaron
Wed Oct 28 2009 14:54
I'm proud of you Bandwagon, you actually cited something. This is a big day for you. Pat yourself on the back, you deserve it.

Unfortunately, the article in question again only reinforces the points I made which were that the Taliban was only willing to give up Osama to be judged by Islamic courts (if at all). The article also mentions a number of times the Taliban said they would do something and then not do it.

So while I stand corrected about when the Taliban "offered" Osama, you have done nothing to refute the fact that much of the offers were simply rhetoric with no actual promise behind the words. While the Taliban is continually promising up Osama, Osama is lending Al-qaeda troops to the Taliban, his son marries the daughter of the Taliban's leader, and al-qaeda uses a suicide bomber to kill the leader of the Northern Alliance, the main faction opposing the Taliban in Aghanistan. So yeah, They were really in a big hurry to give him up.

But if you want to go ahead and believe and trust a group that supports terrorism and genocide which are both morally upstanding ideals, then go ahead, I won't stop you.

P.S. Naw, I enjoy disproving you too much to stop posting.

cece
Tue Oct 27 2009 17:52
james i would like to tell you i read all of your articles but i must say i know you wrote this article from the heart for your friend charity and it showed.you are right when you wrote we were pulled in this war based on lies by bush and his friends . the american people were lied to about every aspect of these two wars . bush and his vice president were on a mission and that was to finish what his daddy had started. these two wars have been going on eight years with no end in sight .how much more blood will be shed before we wake up and say no more. 0ver five thousand of our troops have been killed and many more wounded . if you were to stand our wounded and dead on a hillside and look at these brave men and women you would never be able to sleep again because you know they are someones loved ones .what a price these brave men and women paid . these two wars are twins to the vietnam war which was fought for sixteen years with no winner and loss of life and bloodshed we can not wrap our mind around. history tells if we do not learn from our mistakes we are doomed to repeat them. keep writing these articles and i will keep reading theme.excellent writing james.
Bandwagon Patriot
Tue Oct 27 2009 12:36
Over three years and on as many continents, U.S. officials met in public and secret at least 20 times with Taliban representatives to discuss ways the regime could bring suspected terrorist Osama bin Laden to justice.

Talks continued until just days before the Sept. 11 attacks, and Taliban representatives repeatedly suggested they would hand over bin Laden if their conditions were met, sources close to the discussions said.

Some Afghan experts argue that throughout the negotiations, the United States never recognized the Taliban need for aabroh, the Pashtu word for "face-saving formula." Officials never found a way to ease the Taliban's fear of embarrassment if it turned over a fellow Muslim to an "infidel" Western power.

"We were not serious about the whole thing, not only this administration but the previous one," said Richard Hrair Dekmejian, an expert in Islamic fundamentalism and author at the University of Southern California. "We did not engage these people creatively. There were missed opportunities."

Source: Washington Post October 29, 2001

PS: you're wrong; stop posting

Aaron
Tue Oct 27 2009 09:30
Bandwagon,

You may mean that they tried offering Osama before and after the US invasion of Afghanistan rather than 9/11 because they never offered to Osama up before 9/11.

Before the invasion, they only offered up Osama to be tried by Islamic Sharia Law in Pakistan which means absolutely nothing.

After the invasion, they offered him to a neutral country if the US would stop bombing cities. Given the Taliban's track record, that promise was about as worthless as monopoly money.

Don't forget, the Taliban was only recognized as the rulers of Afghanistan by 3 countries before 9/11, and was only recognized by Pakistan by the time the US invaded. Due to their human rights violations, genocidal tendancies, and support of a massive terroist group, this was not an organization with any international bargaining power.

Bandwagon Patriot
Mon Oct 26 2009 20:26
Taliban offered to hand over bin Laden both before and after 9-11. US still invaded. George W. Bush is a bad president.

Hope that helps.

Russ
Mon Oct 26 2009 18:29
The Taliban do pose a threat to us, an obvious one that our foremost military leaders understand. They're the ones who gave protection to al-Qaida, after the attack on our soil. Why did they do so, unless they were supporting the attack? I'm not saying we should go into this lightly, but I do think this mission is imperative.
Bandwagon Patriot
Mon Oct 26 2009 14:02
Yeah, let's fight the Taliban, who never attacked America! Because they "pose a serious threat".

Good call, "military scholar" Russ!

Your name
Mon Oct 26 2009 12:51
Russ, I don't know the ideals of a military scholar but you're reasoning is similar to a gambling addict who doesn't know when to stop.
Russ
Mon Oct 26 2009 12:04
Equating the war in Iraq with Afghanistan in the least is misguided. Of course, no one wants soldiers in harm's way, but why would we have a military, if they shouldn't be called up for extreme purposes? And Afghanistan is an extreme purpose.

It's the Taliban that's the real problem in Afghanistan, not al-Qaida. They're the one's we're worried about in Afghanistan, and they pose a serious threat. They're everywhere in Afghanistan.

Moreover, the first election was bad, so you're saying we should just give up? Quit? Or should we make sure that things there are under control before we leave, and thus leave that country (and, yes, our future) in the hands of a government that everyone knows is crooked? How does leaving help us--or your friend--whose fighting would then be in vain?

Obviously, you're no military scholar and perhaps should keep your columns to entertainment.

Jaclyn Cosgrove
Mon Oct 26 2009 03:19
This column is part of a three-part series in today's opinion section. Make sure to check out the other two columns as well. We appreciate your support.
Thanks,
- Jaclyn

Jaclyn Cosgrove
Web editor
The Daily O'Collegian
jaclyn.cosgrove@ocolly.com







log out