Afghanistan is Vietnam all over again

The situation in Afghanistan has just gotten a whole lot worse.

No, I'm not talking about any battlefield victories by the Taliban. I'm not talking about battlefield setbacks for the U.S. I'm not talking about the new U.S. military leadership.

What I am talking about is the decision back in Washington by the commander in chief to run this seemingly endless engagement, with no clear definition of victory, like it was a rerun of the Vietnam war.

I've told you about the new rules of engagement in Afghanistan that suggest American soldiers have essentially been ordered not to fight a war, but to conduct a police action much like they would if they were dealing with suspected criminals in the United States:

U.S. troops are under orders not to fire unless fired upon.
U.S. troops are under strict orders not to return fire if civilians are present.
U.S. troops are under orders not to fire on terrorists who they believe have just planted improvised explosive devices meant to kill them if they are walking away. Only if they catch them in the act are they permitted to engage.

This is a recipe for disaster.

Here's your chance to participate in the restoration of America! Join Joseph Farah at WorldNetDaily's Taking America Back national conference this fall

It's a recipe for another Vietnam, where the politicians back home were calling the shots rather than the brave fighting men and women on the scene.

Our soldiers know they will be second-guessed if they make a bad call. They might even be second-guessed if they make the right call.

We simply can't win like this.

But this is nothing new. These rules of engagement have already been in effect in Afghanistan for some time, which explains why we're not winning the war. What's new is word that violating these insane "rules of engagement" in Afghanistan could guarantee a U.S. soldier a court martial, even though there are significant concerns the rules actually damage the ability of soldiers to protect themselves in the heat of combat with the Taliban.

U.S. soldiers are being told to consider an Article 15 investigation as part of the after-action review process, one informed source said. "This is simply incredible. It's like saying '(courts-martial) will happen, just consider that to be part of your counseling process,'" the military source said.

WND and my own G2 Bulletin reported last December that the new rules of engagement ostensibly designed to protect Afghan civilians were putting the lives of U.S. forces in jeopardy as the Taliban began to use them to their advantage.

In Vietnam, soldiers called this fighting with one hand tied behind one's back. It's one of the reasons U.S. soldiers won every battle on the ground but the U.S. lost the war. Vietnam was a war micromanaged by politicians in Washington who didn't know the first thing about combat. And that's what's happening again today with the war in Afghanistan.

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't care to see one more U.S. soldier die or be maimed in this war that we don't intend to win but seem determined to lose.

It's immoral and unconscionable to send young Americans to Afghanistan to risk their lives in such an ill-advised and ill-conceived battle plan with no clear objectives but a laundry list of restrictions on their actions.

I admit, I was a supporter of going after al-Qaida and the Taliban after the Sept. 11 attack. But I thought the idea was to kill the bad guys and get out. I didn't realize it was our intention to permanently colonize Afghanistan and police it for eternity. That seems to be the new plan.

This war has got to end. I don't mind using tactical nuclear weapons to defeat the Taliban. I don't mind using any advanced technology at our disposal. But I cannot countenance a military deployment in which our soldiers have to be attacked before they can shoot the bad guys.

That idea is sick and twisted and immoral.