Statehood for Afghanistan, Iraq and Mexico
I wonder what the world would be like if the United States, instead of being the pansies we have become, had just moved into Afghanistan, pacified the primary military/militias and then had declared Afghanistan open for settlement just like we did the Western United States? Think about it: The organization of the Afghan people is very similar to the way the indians (um…native Americans) were organized–not much. The government, or what there is/was of it, depends upon the constantly shifting sands of tribal alliances.
Why not just open Afghanistan up for settlement under the Homestead Act? Homesteading was allowed in the lower 48 of the United States all of the way up until 1976. In Alaska it continued for an additional 10 years. It has only been shut completely down since 1986. Why not open it back up again? The Law of Land Warfare supports my contention that Afghanistan belongs to the United States now.
Title to a 160 acre homestead, under the homestead act, was secured by filing a claim on the land, living on it and making improvements to it and, after this was done, filing for the Title. This is how the original American dream was made, folks. The entire United States was settled, and yes I do mean settled after being taken from a weak opponent, in a similar manner. The first 13 Colonies were settled under Royal Land Grants and the rest under the Homestead Act and its predecessors.
I can hear the murmurs of horror and the early cries of protest now: “No, that’s imperialist!”, “No that’s racist!”, “No, that’s not fair!”, “What kind of message would that send the world? What would they think?”. Let me answer each of these….
The “imperialist” argument: Merriam Webster defines “Imperialist”, in the second definition, as ” the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas; broadly : the extension or imposition of power, authority, or influence”. So, yes, it is imperialist. Cry me a river libs.
The “racist” and “not fair” arguments: Folks, there is nothing racist about subduing and eliminating a country that provided a safe haven for a guerrilla army to train itself to commit mass murder on the country that subdues and eliminates it. The Afghan people would become resident aliens. They, like the indians, would have an expedited path to citizenship if they chose to pursue that direction. We could give them a reasonable amount of time, say 2 years, to become citizens and file for homestead on their property. We could use our considerable influence to get them passage to and citizenship in other countries as well. Those still left who refuse to file for citizenship or to leave would be treated as hostile and confined to reservations (and paid millions and millions in 100 years when the “injustice” is finally realized).
The “What kind of message would that send the world? What would they think?” argument: Well, what would y’all think? I can tell you what I’d think: “I don’t want to mess with them”, and no matter what they thought I guarantee that they’d keep it to themselves.
That, folks, would solve a lot of problems: 1)Poor, economically disadvantaged folks could go out and get their own land, 2) Iran would have one of the 51 States on its border, 3) Solid foothold in Asia, 4) capital investment would assuredly flow to the newest State, 5) They would pay taxes, 6) Nice placement for a military base, 7) Good and close to China, 8) Pakistan would have a new neighbor, 9) Israel would definitely breathe easier with a State just on the other side of Syria, Iraq and Iran (close enough for heavy air support, etc.), 10) As Gen “Chesty” Puller said, “All right, they’re on our left, they’re on our right, they’re in front of us, they’re behind us…they can’t get away this time.”.
Now, before we go re-doing the flag for 51 stars, I wonder how many States we could divide Mexico into?
Now don’t get me wrong, I do not believe that the United States should just go out and take over other countries all willy-nilly but when the country in question harbors terrorists or guerillas that attack us or when they are obviously in the act of invading us, then I do not see any problems with expanding these united States at all.