Mr. Rozeff, writing in LewRockwell.com,
states that:
Preventing this or any region from being used as a base for terror is not a vital U.S. security interest...
This strategy is so important and such an important component of U.S. policy that I give it a name. I call is the Denial of Region or DOR strategy.
Denial of Region or DOR is a central feature of the anti-terror strategy that has guided American policy in both the Bush and Obama administrations... the DOR strategy hasn’t succeeded.
Why has the DOR strategy not met with success in Afghanistan?
If the DOR strategy that the U.S. follows doesn’t diminish terrorism and actually enhances it, and if it destabilizes whole countries and regions, isn’t that enough to cast this doctrine aside?
There is one more thing, and that is the outlandish cost of it. Afghanistan alone has cost over $0.5 trillion in cash plus the many killed and wounded and it’s not over yet.Let’s shed some light on how wasteful this spending is. The Oklahoma City bombing took 168 lives. Wrongful death settlements vary in America, but suppose we use $10 million. This is a generous figure. Then the monetary compensation to survivors if these were wrongful death claims comes to $10 million x 168 = $1.7 billion. But the war in Afghanistan has already claimed 1,400 lives and over 15,000 injured and, on top of that, cost 328 times $1.7 billion!
In other words, ask yourself if the war in Afghanistan has prevented the equivalent of 328 Oklahoma City bombings, not even counting the 1,400 dead?
To my way of thinking, the Afghanistan war is all cost and no benefit.
Ask yourself how much good or how much safety American could have purchased here at home for the $557 billion spent in Afghanistan?