W

e 
just 
passed 
the 
17-year 
anniversary 
of 
the 
war 
in 
Afghanistan. 
You 
know, the one most 
people forget we’re 
actually 
fighting 
because we’ve been 
there since most of us 
can remember. And 
yet, despite the fact 
that most of us don’t 
exactly 
understand 
why we keep sending 
our soldiers overseas, 
thousands of men 
and women are still 
dying as a result of this war, both 
from our country and theirs. This 
is the longest war in American 
history, and while the basics are 
well known, what is not known is 
why a seemingly in-and-out job 
has stretched on for 17 years.
As is common knowledge, the 
war in Afghanistan started as a 
result of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. 
In response to these attacks, 
the 
U.S. 
decided 
to 
invade 
Afghanistan in order to find 
Osama bin Laden, remove the 
Taliban from power and prevent 
Afghanistan from harboring any 
more 
terrorist 
organizations. 
While Osama bin Laden was 
killed in 2011 and the Taliban 
rule was toppled in 2001, the 
Taliban insurgency remained. 
Up until leaving office in 2017, 
former President Barack Obama 
had been slowly drawing troops 
out of Afghanistan and focusing 
on advising the new government 
rather than fighting. However, 
Trump 
has 
stated 
the 
war 
will continue for an indefinite 
period of time and has loosened 
restrictions placed on military 
action in Afghanistan imposed 
by the Obama administration. 
We have spent almost 1.07 trillion 
dollars, cost 2,403 American 
servicemen their lives and lost 
28,000 Afghan civilian lives on 
the war in Afghanistan, not to 
mention the 17,674 servicemen 
and 50,000 Afghan civilians 
injured.
Right now, we’re at the 
point where we can’t exactly 
win, but there’s still a lot to lose. 
With the Taliban still linked to 
al-Qaeda, there remains a chance 
for more terrorist attacks. John 
Nicholson, the U.S. commander 

in Afghanistan has said, “There 
is a threat from this region to our 
homeland. So our choice is fairly 
simple: We either keep 
the pressure on them 
here, or they bring the 
fight to our doorstep.” 
Yet we have funneled 
billions of dollars and 
thousands of soldiers 
into a fight where we 
cannot seem to come 
out on top.
This 
threat 
perceived 
by 
our 
leaders 
continues 
to 
bring men and women 
into foreign territory to fight a 
war they know very little about. 
But while this has been the case 
for many years, what’s different 
now is this year kids who weren’t 
even alive when the war started 

can now enlist to fight. Think 
about that. These kids don’t even 
know life not at war. Living the 
majority of our lives post-9/11 has 
changed our generation in ways 
we can’t possibly understand 
because we don’t know anything 
different.
The New York Times recently 
put out a feature by C.J. Chivers 
on 
a 
then-19-year-old 
man 
named Robert Soto, a specialist 
in the First Battalion of the 26th 
Infantry, fighting in Afghanistan. 
Chivers interviewed Soto in 2009 
and learned he was 10 years 
old when the twin towers were 
struck. He distinctly remembers 
being picked up from school by 
his father and seeing the fear in 
his eyes. Though he was young, 
this had a profound impact on 
his life and led him to enlist in 
the infantry in 2007. He said he 
wanted to be an actor after the 
war if he survives.

“He had his idealism and 
his hope scraped away at an 
extraordinarily 
young 
age,” 
Chivers wrote about Soto losing 
friends and people he admired 
in the violence. While the story 
of Robert Soto is a sad one, he 
understood what he was fighting 
for. He grew up in New York 
and was deeply affected by the 
attacks. 
He 
understood 
the 
magnitude of the event because 
he remembered what life was like 
before. Our generation has not 
had that experience.
Having grown up in a post-
9/11 era, our generation is so 
removed from the war, we don’t 
even consider it in our everyday 
lives. We barely even consider 
our country at war at all. Because 
this war is being fought halfway 
around the world, and not at our 
doorstep, it removes us from 
the everyday consequences of 
growing up in a country at war.
Everyone is asking when the 
war will be over, but not enough 
people are asking what effect 
the war will have or has already 
had. This is impossible to answer 
because we don’t know when it 
will end and we don’t know what 
life was like before. People are 
giving up their lives for a war they 
don’t even remember starting. It 
has simply become a part of our 
existence now. The question is: 
What do we do about it?
While we can’t exactly pull all 
of our troops out of Afghanistan 
today and let the people left there 
fend for themselves, we do need 
to reevaluate what we can and 
should be doing in Afghanistan 
to alleviate the situation. There 
are many ethnic and tribal 
complexities 
at 
play, 
which 
makes the situation difficult to 
assess. The idea of recruiting and 
training a national Afghan army 
has been proposed to improve 
the situation, but this has already 
failed. There is no guarantee that 
these ideas or solutions will ease 
the situation, but what we are 
currently doing is not working 
and something has to change. 
Because 17 years is too long to be 
fighting.

Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4 — Tuesday, October 9, 2018

Emma Chang
Ben Charlson
Joel Danilewitz
Samantha Goldstein
Emily Huhman

Tara Jayaram
Jeremy Kaplan
Lucas Maiman
Magdalena Mihaylova
Ellery Rosenzweig
Jason Rowland

Anu Roy-Chaudhury
Alex Satola
Ali Safawi
Ashley Zhang
Sam Weinberger

DAYTON HARE
Managing Editor

420 Maynard St. 
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
 tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.

ALEXA ST. JOHN
Editor in Chief
 ANU ROY-CHAUDHURY AND 
ASHLEY ZHANG
Editorial Page Editors

Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily’s Editorial Board. 
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

SOPHIE HOLOHAN | LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Body shaming
E

llery Rosenzweig makes 
an incredible point about 
current views of fat people 
in our society. As someone who 
has identified as a bigger person 
throughout the course of her life, 
I find that the current ideology 
toward fat people is extremely 
harmful and polarizing. I think 
that stereotypes involving this 
group of individuals were rooted 
in our minds during the formative 
stages of development and are 
currently perpetuated through the 
outlet of social media.
At a young age, we are shown 
that fat people, especially women, 
are evil or lazy. For example, 
the only fat characters that have 
significant roles in Disney movies 
just so happen to be the villains, 

such as Ursula from “The Little 
Mermaid” or the Queen of Hearts 
from 
“Alice 
in 
Wonderland.” 
This is not to say that every evil 
character is heavier, but to suggest 
that the only time fat people are 
represented is when they are of 
minimal interest to the story or 
when they are the villain. This 
may cause children to associate fat 
people with negativity, whether 
they actually are cognizant of 
these messages or not.
Though we are not little 
kids 
anymore, 
we 
are 
still 
being influenced by these toxic 
narratives through social media. 
While higher numbers on the 
scale can and do lead to health 
problems, those with extremely 
skinny frames can also face these 

difficulties, though these people 
are often praised for their figures 
on social media. I don’t believe 
that we should normalize any 
exceptional weight, either low or 
high, as being “healthy,” but I do 
believe that we should encourage 
the perpetuation of all people as 
beautiful.
Once we stop associating a 
number with beauty and morals, 
“body positivity” will truly become 
a positive way to instill confidence 
instead of a response to society’s 
hatred of fat.

Are we there yet? 17 years since Afghanistan

Blackout Brett

DANA PIERANGELI | COLUMN

Sophie Holohan is a high school 

student at Notre Dame High School in 

San Jose, CA.

I

n 
recent 
weeks, 
the 
nation has been gripped 
by the ugly controversy 
surrounding 
Brett 
Kavanaugh’s 
confirmation 
to the U.S. Supreme Court. 
On one side, Kavanaugh’s 
supporters describe him as a 
“carpool dad.” That was the 
prevailing 
narrative 
until 
several of his high school and 
college classmates, including 
Christine 
Blasey 
Ford, 
Deborah Ramirez and Julie 
Swetnick, 
came 
forward 
to recount a very different 
version of Kavanaugh.
One 
common 
thread 
among the various accounts 
of 
a 
young 
Kavanaugh’s 
violence, 
whether 
it 
be 
sexual assault or a bar fight, 
is 
alcohol. 
Hearing 
the 
stories of Ford, Ramirez, 
Swetnick and others paints a 
familiar, horrifying picture 
for us college students. We 
all 
know 
either 
someone 
like young Kavanaugh or 
someone who has been hurt 
by such a person.
Just like attorney Anita 
Hill’s 
testimony 
in 
1991 
sparked a deep conversation 
about workplace harassment, 
the 
stories 
of 
Ford 
and 
the 
others 
should 
begin 
a 
national 
conversation 
about the kind of excessive 
consumption of alcohol, and 
the consequences of such 
behavior Kavanaugh engaged 
in during his high school and 
college years.
There 
were 
many 
disturbing 
revelations 
and 
reactions 
throughout 
Kavanaugh’s 
confirmation 
process, from the unhinged 
diatribe 
by 
Sen. 
Lindsey 
Graham, 
R-S.C., 
against 
the Democrats to President 
Trump’s open mockery of 
Ford at a Mississippi rally. 
I cannot begin to imagine 
how sexual assault survivors 
across America must have 
felt as they watched Ford’s 
harrowing 
testimony 
and 
the following wave of vitriol 
from Kavanaugh’s defenders.
The fight to keep Brett 
Kavanaugh off the Supreme 
Court bench may have been 
lost, but good can still come 
from 
this. 
For 
example, 
the Rape, Abuse and Incest 
National 
Network 
sexual 
assault hotline saw a 147 
percent spike in calls. More 
can and should be done, 
because there are hundreds, 
if not thousands, of young 
men like Kavanaugh who 
have 
committed 
sexual 
violence while under the 
influence of alcohol, and 
thousands of young women 
who have been victimized 

like Ford.
I 
have 
no 
doubt 
that, 
even without alcohol, Brett 
Kavanaugh 
has 
and 
will 
continue to use his power and 
privilege to hurt women. His 
judicial record of anti-choice 
decisions is a clear example, 
as 
was 
his 
disturbing 
exchange 
with 
Sen. 
Amy 
Klobuchar, D-Minn., where 
he 
deflected 
a 
question 
about his own history with 
alcohol and instead asked the 
Senator if she had ever gotten 
blackout drunk. Klobuchar’s 
father has struggled with 
alcoholism, a fact that she 
revealed 
in 
the 
hearing, 
and his retort was a cruel, 
disrespectful low blow.
We 
need 
to 
change 

the 
culture 
surrounding 
alcohol and drunk behavior. 
Kavanaugh should have been 
called 
out 
three 
decades 
ago — before he assaulted 
Ford 
and 
others 
— 
by 
his group of friends who 
undoubtedly 
noticed 
his 
violent tendencies. Instead, 
his 
friend 
group 
enabled 
him and each other in what 
they 
described 
in 
their 
high school yearbook as the 
treasurer of the “Keg City 
Club — 100 Kegs or Bust.”
In our culture, on campus 
and beyond, alcohol is often 
seen as an excuse for bad 
behavior. Brett Kavanaugh 
and 
Brock 
Turner, 
the 
ex-Stanford swimmer who 
raped an unconscious woman, 
were both exonerated in the 
eyes of thousands of people 
because of alcohol. Now, of 
course, white male privilege 
played 
an 
arguable 
role 
(would a woman or man of 
color be so easily forgiven?) 
but we should not ignore how 
alcohol makes it easier to 
overlook their violence.
While 
reading 
accounts 
of 
Kavanaugh’s 
behavior 
in high school and at Yale, 
I could not help but recall 
the story of the president of 
one University of Michigan 
fraternity (I will not name 

names) who told a sorority 
president that “it isn’t my 
fault that your girls can’t 
handle their liquor” when 
she confronted him about the 
sexual 
assault 
perpetrated 
by his fraternity brothers. 
That sentiment was basically 
replicated on the floor of 
the Senate and in the media. 
Alcohol washes violent men of 
their sins but not women.
From Greek life to Capitol 
Hill, 
America 
needs 
a 
fundamental reset on how 
we view alcohol and drunk 
behavior. We have already 
done so with drunk driving 
— just look at any number of 
“Drive Sober or Get Pulled 
Over” commercials. If hurting 
someone in a traffic accident 
while under the influence of 
alcohol is looked down upon in 
the harshest terms by society, 
then so should all kinds of 
alcohol-related violence.
I’m sure everyone who has 
drunk alcohol has said or 
done something regrettable 
and problematic, sometimes 
very problematic. We all need 
to hold ourselves accountable 
for what we do while under 
the influence, no matter how 
severe the mistakes we make 
are. I understand why using 
alcohol to absolve ourselves of 
our mistakes is so tempting, 
as the alternative is shame 
and guilt. But that shame is 
telling us that we have done 
something wrong, and instead 
of burying that feeling we 
should use it as a catalyst for 
change.
If a person cannot control 
themselves or remember what 
they do while drunk, they 
have a responsibility to make 
sure they do not get to that 
point, whether it be by getting 
sober or moderating their 
drinking. Every perpetrator of 
alcohol-induced violence was 
responsible 
for 
themselves 
getting 
to 
that 
point. 
I 
understand that alcohol is 
addictive, and I do not mean 
to shame people struggling 
with 
alcoholism; 
however, 
our society’s attitude towards 
alcohol, in my opinion, fuels 
the self-denial that keeps many 
people from getting the help 
they need.
By holding ourselves and 
those close to us accountable 
for 
our 
behavior 
while 
drinking, instead of sweeping 
it under the rug, we can 
hopefully begin a culture shift 
that can prevent future Brett 
Kavanaughs before they hurt 
others.

Ali Safawi can be reached at 

asafawi@umich.edu. 

ALI SAFAWI | COLUMN

Dana Pierangeli can be reached at 

dmpier@umich.edu.

CONTRIBUTE TO THE CONVERSATION

Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor and op-eds. 
Letters should be fewer than 300 words while op-eds should be 550 
to 850 words. Send the writer’s full name and University affiliation to 
tothedaily@michigandaily.com.

DANA 
PIERANGELI

JOIN OUR EDITORIAL BOARD

Our Editorial Board meets Mondays and Wednesdays 7:15-8:45 PM at 
our newsroom at 420 Maynard Street. All are welcome to come discuss 
national, state and campus affairs.

From Greek life 
to Capitol Hill, 
America needs a 
fundamental reset 
on how we view 
alcohol and drunk 
behavior.

People are giving 
up their lives for 
a war they don’t 
even remember 
starting.

