Readers React: Did the U.S. learn nothing from the Soviets about Afghanistan?

To the editor: I shake my head at the United States’ continuing involvement in Afghanistan. Why does our country repeatedly ignore the experiences of other nations by first sending advisors, then troops to foreign countries where there is a history of outsiders’ unsuccessful attempts at intervention? (“Yes, the U.S. can leave Afghanistan,” Op-Ed, Oct. 18)

We certainly did not learn from France’s unsuccessful eight-year war with Vietnamese guerrillas before our own involvement in Vietnam. Then we ignored the Soviet Union’s 10-year quagmire in Afghanistan, and now we are going on 15 years there.

Is it hubris that prevents us from considering the experiences of those that have gone before us? Where will we make this mistake again?

Susan Barajas, Alta Loma

..

To the editor: Andrew J. Bacevich’s Op-Ed article makes a number of cogent points to support his argument for the United States leaving both Afghanistan and Iraq. I too share his dismay at what we have wrought in Iraq and the daunting odds of anything resembling a satisfactory outcome there.

However, he omits perhaps the most important reason we must maintain a military presence in Afghanistan: the dramatic advancement in women’s rights. Clearly that was not a primary objective of our invasion, but it is an important and dramatic consequence.

I believe that we have a moral and ethical obligation to protect these historic changes, and by withdrawing entirely they will be rapidly reversed.

Lawrence Marshall, Rancho Santa Fe

..

To the editor: Although Bacevich is correct, his reasoning is convoluted. Simply put, Afghanistan was in chaos when U.S. troops arrived, is in chaos now, and will be in chaos when the U.S troops pull out, whether now or five years from now.

Because time will not solve Afghanistan’s problems, we should bring the troops home now.

William Gray, Whittier

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook