Now, remember, how long it took to pacify the tribes and settle them on reservations. It is unlikely that a Western model government in Afghanistan or Pakistan is likely to control all the ground in either country any time soon. Some kind of a federation of the tribes, as reflected in the periodic national councils, is certainly possible, and is probably more likely in Afghanistan than in Pakistan. Pakistan suffers from the imposition of the British model of government, which works well in a modern homogenous society but has not worked well in most Third World countries.

We see the familiar story in much of both countries that, “you own the ground you stand on” and maybe as far as you can see. The rest of the territory is debatable space.

Candidate Obama talked about invading Pakistan at will, a la the Cambodian incursions. (We were in Cambodia and Laos during the Viet Nam war unofficially long before we went in openly with armor and air.) He, or his advisors, had at least correctly identified Pakistan as a major part of the problem. How President Obama will actually accomplish this remains an open subject. Note that the use of air strikes into Pakistan, begun under Bush, continues under Obama, without much fanfare.

We are fortunate, so far, that Russia, China and Iran have not taken more active roles in stirring the pot. It is also interesting that no one seems to be taking the realpolitik path of setting up a strongman in Afghanistan or Pakistan and leaving them to rule with a heavy hand. (I agree, but the way: strong men haven’t worked out very well for us, although a number survive in the former Soviet Asian countries.)

Interesting times. I an concerned that the American government will insist on the perfect and reject the “good enough”.

I think they will be targeted. If they are listening they will think the same thing too.

The same could be said about India, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, and other countries in that region.

Pakistan is not falling apart. Rather, some regions are demanding more cultural autonomy or control over their natural resources.

Also, the Congressional declaration that authorized the USA to invade Afghanistan suffices to authorize also the USA to attack targets inside Pakistan. No members of Congress have criticized such attacks. Since Obama became President, the USA has continued to carry out such attacks as before.

The resultant misdirection and lack of awareness of peripheral, subsidiary players hobbles us every time. Everything that afflicts a size-able human demographic, from epidemics to natural catastrophes to relative poverty is mis-described, mis-treated and usually exacerbated by this dumb tendency.

(We all remember the attempts by media and politicians to shove recent natural disasters like Hurricane Katrina and the terrible S.E. Asian tsunami (“America is Stingy”) into this confining box.)

Worse, and, this drives my enthusiasm for sites like Wretchards, this “tick” of looking for a single-point locus is not inevitable in humans. It is being modeled daily in media and other commons’ to the detriment of more atomized, diverse analytical methods.

In essence, we’re being taught to think this silly way. The result is an never-ending barrage of dichotomous, false choices. Whether it is intentional or not, diverse, pluralistic thought is stunted, and we are edged ever towards petty social conflict as the traditional Anglo defusing behaviors like cheerful tolerance, self-deprecating humor and regional fraternity lose their effectiveness.

Victor Davis Hanson had written about the general “coursening” of America’s political discourse here at PJM. I think that he’s describing the social symptoms of decades of intellectual dumbing. And, it could be that, outside of our borders (“over there”), terrorist attacks, piracy-on-the-seas, wars and urban insurgencies are the taxes we pay for becoming dumb.