If it took Nixon to go to China, maybe it will take Bush, (former?) neo-isolationist, to boldly go to Afghanistan, in a way to both guarantee its future peace, freedom, and security (which would also be served by permanent occupation) and to let the world, and the Middle East, know that things have changed in perhaps an epochal way - the U.S., for its own safety (and possibly survival), must become fully engaged in the world, near the cradle of civilization.

There are two big (and related) problems to be solved: innocent people suffering and dying in the world because of other people's possession of power (oppression), and innocent people suffering and dying because of other people's desire to possess power (terrorism). We're fighting both, but at the moment, it seems more politically popular (globally) to fight the latter.

Here - with Afghanistan - is a rare chance to fight the former - oppression - with the support of most of the globe, because the Taliban combined oppression and support for terrorism in such hideous ways, repugnant to (almost) everyone.

Now in order for this speech to be given, a few things will have to be done to lay the groundwork. (As I write this, the war in Afghanistan is in its 3d day.)

Diplomacy - allies will have to be convinced this is a good thing, and they should express their support. The diplomats will no doubt come up with more good arguments for this than I can, but let me suggest:

• having a rock-ribbed democracy on the border of the Middle East and Central Asia is good for other democracies (such as Europe and Russia).
• having a stable government in Afghanistan (one of the longest-lived governments in the world, in fact) is good for stability in the region, as long as the other governments there don't
  • support terrorism, or
  • support oppression (perhaps defined as egregious violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights).

Non-allies in the region will have to be convinced that this is good for them, too. Of course, it may not be (Iraq?), but the diplomats should work on it anyway. Maybe there will be a change of government or two.

Afghanistan itself: the people will have to request that they be allowed to join the U.S. It is to be hoped that after a quick military victory and a humanitarian occupation, the people of Afghanistan will realize that of all the choices for a new government open to them, membership in the U.S. will provide them with the most freedom (which Afghans are reknowned for desiring), including freedom of religion, and stability. The governments prior to the Taliban, it seems, were not so great either. We should start with the support of at least half the population (the female half), and should be able to work it up from there.

Islamic people worldwide: diplomats should try to point out to those who are not jihad-inclined (I hope, a vast majority) that the United States is very, very big on religious freedom, and that Muslims in the U.S. are very happy with their ability to practice their religion to their heart's content. Those Muslims who think their religion requires them to try and control the polity (theocracy) should be isolated: it should be pointed out to them that this violates human rights conventions of all kinds...

Propaganda: diplomacy by other means (except military) should do the same things to try and convince the citizenry as opposed to the politicians. One without the other makes for much greater difficulty.

Military: the buildup around and in Afghanistan should be overwhelming, far beyond what anyone is thinking now. I expect some serious opposition. I think there is still an under-estimation of the terrorists. Intelligence is severely lacking.

And I'm sure there's much more preparation that needs to be done.