PPI - Radically Pragmatic
  • Donate
Skip to content
  • Home
  • About
    • About Us
    • Locations
    • Careers
  • People
  • Projects
  • Our Work
  • Events
  • Donate

Our Work

Explaining Afghanistan Better

  • November 13, 2009
  • Jim Arkedis

Eugene Robinson is a wonderful writer with whom I quite often agree.

But if such a talented, astute observer of the American political landscape hasn’t deciphered why we’re in Afghanistan, and that those costs are worth bearing, then the White House better prepare for an all-out charm offensive once the strategy and troop-level decisions have been made.

In Robinson’s most recent column, he laments:

Sending more troops will mean more coffins arriving at Dover, more funerals at Arlington, more stress and hardship for military families. It would be wrong to demand such sacrifice in the absence of military goals that are clear, achievable and worthwhile.

And what goals in Afghanistan remotely satisfy those criteria?

[…]

As long as our goals in Afghanistan remain as elusive as they are now, Obama shouldn’t be sending troops. He should be bringing them out.

As I’ve argued countless times, though America has long since grown tired of the seemingly endless wars, there are — and will continue to be — compelling national security reasons to remain in Afghanistan and adopt much of Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s counterinsurgency strategy.

However, that’s not the point of my post. Rather, it’s that I expect the White House to soon announce another deployment of some 30,000+ troops to Afghanistan. President Obama must be prepared to explain our security interests as he sends more Americans into harm’s way. Distracted, I imagine, by the endless health care debate, the president must soon do a better job of selling the public on his administration’s latest controversial decision.

Related Work

In the News  |  June 29, 2026

Ainsley on The Good Fight Club: Why the Center Left Is Losing, the Squad vs. the Median Voter, and How Patriotism Wins Elections

  • Claire Ainsley
Op-Ed  |  June 22, 2026

Steitz for The Hill: Eliminating This Crucial Intelligence Agency Would Make America Less Safe

  • Danielle Steitz
Press Release  |  June 17, 2026

PPI Responds to Clayton Nomination Delay: President Trump is Playing Politics with America’s National Security

  • Danielle Steitz
Op-Ed  |  June 16, 2026

Ainsley for Fondation Jean Jaures: The “Third Left”: Sovereign Citizens

  • Claire Ainsley
In the News  |  June 5, 2026

Jacoby on WCPT 820: Chew’s Views with Richard Chew

  • Tamar Jacoby
In the News  |  June 4, 2026

Ainsley on Talking Progress: Industrial Heartlands: Shifting the Tide through Local Leadership

  • Claire Ainsley
  • Never miss an update:

  • Subscribe to our newsletter
PPI Logo
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Donate
  • Careers
  • © 2026 Progressive Policy Institute. All Rights Reserved.
  • |
  • Privacy Policy
  • |
  • Privacy Settings