You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (39)

PLAYS: (139)

November 21, 2009 FOX News

I'm totally against the Afghanistan war, as C&Lers know, and it was lost as soon as Bush and Cheney decided to attack Iraq. Any chance to stabilize that region was lost immediately thereafter. The world had rallied around Afghanistan in such a way that that country could have been reconstructed and repaired by now.

So President Obama finds himself in a bad situation caused by conservative beliefs and now there really is only one strategy left: When do we leave? That being said, Fred Thompson, in a hatchet-job fashion, says the Afghan war is lost too, because Obama just isn't into it. Wow, aren't Republicans into fighting endless wars for profits?

Fred Thompson must know that Bush abandoned Afghanistan and forged his move to attack and remove the Taliban as nothing more than a chess move to attack Iraq.

Former Sen. Fred Thompson today intensified his party's criticism of President Obama's long deliberation over policy in Afghanistan, announcing that Obama's delay signals that "the war has been lost" and that nothing the president now does will "make any difference."

"It really doesn't matter how President Obama divides the Afghan baby, how he splits the difference between McChrystal and Biden. Because the war has been lost," Thompson said on his radio show today. "I say this because of one sad and simple fact. The president does not have the will and determination to do what's necessary to win it. His heart's not in it, and never has been. The Taliban knows it. Al Qaeda knows it. Our allies know it. And the American people know it.

Americans turned against these two wars a long time ago and public opinion will only keep declining. Vermin like Thompson only look for opportunities to cut up the president as often as possible. And they are using this conflict like the blade. They are a sad movement.

Thompson has the nerve to suggest that a sitting President doesn't care what happens in a war that is taking place now. These conservatives have no shame and that's why conservatism is a sham.
Remember the Faux outrage over Harry Reid?

This morning on Fox News Sunday, Weekly Standard editor William Kristol said that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) remark that the Iraq war is lost is “much more disgraceful” than Sen. Trent Lott’s (R-MS) 2002 claim that the country would be much better off if it had maintained racist segregation policies.

“What Harry Reid said is much more disgraceful than anything Trent Lott said, and I do think Democrats should ask Harry Reid to step down,” Kristol said.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (926)

PLAYS: (3267)

November 13, 2009 MSNBC
Dylan Ratigan pushes his "Space Agenda"
GO DYLAN!

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (38)

PLAYS: (107)

November 12, 2009 BBC World
FOURTEEN months after Sabi went missing, in the same firefight that led to SAS Trooper Mark Donaldson being awarded a Victoria Cross, the much-loved veteran explosive sniffer dog has returned to barracks.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (73)

PLAYS: (287)

November 12, 2009 MSNBC The ED Show
Robert Greenwald and Ed Schultz discuss the new cover story of The Nation Magazine "How The US Funds The Taliban"

If this is real resistance, and not a choreographed dance to make himself look "strong," we might possibly (it's a long shot, I know) avoid sinking deeper into this Afghanistan quagmire:

WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama does not plan to accept any of the Afghanistan war options presented by his national security team, pushing instead for revisions to clarify how and when U.S. troops would turn over responsibility to the Afghan government, a senior administration official said Wednesday.

That stance comes in the midst of forceful reservations about a possible troop buildup from the U.S. ambassador in Afghanistan, Karl Eikenberry, according to a second top administration official.

In strongly worded classified cables to Washington, Eikenberry said he had misgivings about sending in new troops while there are still so many questions about the leadership of Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

Obama is still close to announcing his revamped war strategy — most likely shortly after he returns from a trip to Asia that ends on Nov. 19.

But the president raised questions at a war council meeting Wednesday that could alter the dynamic of both how many additional troops are sent to Afghanistan and what the timeline would be for their presence in the war zone, according to the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss Obama's thinking.

Military officials said Obama has asked for a rewrite before and resisted what one official called a one-way highway toward war commander Gen. Stanley McChrystal's recommendations for more troops. The sense that he was being rushed and railroaded has stiffened Obama's resolve to seek information and options beyond military planning, officials said, though a substantial troop increase is still likely.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (63)

PLAYS: (122)

November 09, 2009 ABC NIGHTLINE

President Obama said today that Congress needs to change abortion-related language in the health care bill passed by the House of Representatives this weekend.

"I laid out a very simple principle, which is this is a health care bill, not an abortion bill," Obama said. "And we're not looking to change what is the principle that has been in place for a very long time, which is federal dollars are not used to subsidize abortions."

Saying the bill cannot change the status quo regarding the ban on federally funded abortions, the president said, "There are strong feelings on both sides" about an amendment passed Saturday and added to the legislation, "and what that tells me is that there needs to be some more work before we get to the point where we're not changing the status quo."

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (1476)

PLAYS: (965)

Blue America's Rep. Eric Massa went on the House floor and made an impassioned call to end the Afghanistan war.

Massa: Enough is enough. It is time to bring our troops home. More than any other issue that I have studied, sought counsel on and drawn from my own life's experience for my own guidance since becoming a member of the United State's Congress, the expansion of the war in Afghanistan has drawn my late night focus. There in the quiet of the office, I have arrived at the inevitable conclusion that the deployment of additional troops in Afghanistan and the continuation of this conflict is not in the best interests of our nation and is in fact in on a par with the potential error of the size of our initial invasion in Iraq.

Eric Massa writes:

Last night, November 4th, I spoke on the floor of the House of Representatives to mark the 2,950th day of the war in Afghanistan and formalized my call to draw this conflict to a conclusion. As a freshman member of Congress that served in the United States Navy for 24 years, it has been my honor to serve on the House Armed Services Committee and the House Homeland Security Committee, and because of my background and experience, I think it's my duty to speak out on this issue.

To date, according to the non-partisan Congressional Research Service, the American taxpayer has spent or committed $300,000,000,000 to fund this war. That breaks down to:

• $101,694,915.25 per day for 2,950 days;
• $986.84 per person since our population is roughly 304 million;
• $3,947.36 for each American family of four.

And the greatest cost of this war is of course the 912 American troops killed, and 4,198 wounded. This of course does not include the thousands of internal wounds that our troops must bear for the rest of their lives.

My fellow Americans, the time to bring this war to a conclusion is now and we must stand with a clear voice and demand it. The war in Afghanistan has lasted five times longer than World War I and twice as long as World War II. When 1/3 of Hamid Karzai's ballots were thrown out for voting fraud and Abdullah Abdullah declined the runoff election due to the rampant corruption in the system, the world saw what we already knew - it is simply impossible to impose a democracy on a nation that does not want it.

If you can---please donate a few bucks to Blue America's "No Means No!" act blue page where you will find Eric Massa's name added to the list of those that are standing up to end the occupation in Afghanistan.

We're proposing that netroots donors consider rewarding this good behavior by donating to the re-election campaigns of these members who have already done something very politically difficult by breaking with their own president on a national security issue.
If terrorist threats to our Nation reemerge from Afghanistan, we will strike, but we are not an occupying force

.
If America wasn't bogged down in the two misguided George Bush wars, all the money that we've spent there could easily pay for health insurance reform for all Americans each year. Afghanistan is a country that has never had a central government, and to try and force one down their throats is never going to work.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (39)

PLAYS: (71)

November 04, 2009 C-SPAN

I'd like to thank John for letting me spread the word about this cause, and I'd like to thank everyone here at Crooks and Liars for helping pitch in. It's important that we work to end the war in Afghanistan, and it's important that we support progressive voices who work to do so.

Six months ago, President Obama had ordered in tens of thousands of new troops to Afghanistan while admitting that there was no strategy. Support for the war in Afghanistan was at 50%. Today, 58% oppose the war in Afghanistan. And President Obama right now is engaged in the process of "rethinking Afghanistan."

For the last few months, too, progressive blogger Derrick Crowe has been writing on the Afghanistan war. And his posts have made a difference.

Derrick has brought to bear facts, video testimony, statistics, political insight, and thoughtful arguments to drive home the point that escalating the war in Afghanistan is the wrong policy. Derrick has been writing and researching so prolifically because he's been on a three month fellowship, using funds provided out-of-pocket by the good folks over at Brave New Foundation and the editors at The Seminal.

Yesterday, Derrick's three month fellowship came to an end. Now I'm asking for your help to keep it going, and to support a strong voice against the war in Afghanistan.

Can you pitch in $10 or $20 to help extend Derrick Crowe's blogging fellowship against the war in Afghanistan? Your contribution will go directly to Derrick, and if we can raise $5,000, we can keep the fellowship going for an entire year.

Click here to donate.

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (52)

PLAYS: (127)

November 04, 2009 CNN

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: 21

PLAYS: 2

(Gen. Zia - Tea and Kleenex - there's a message here)

When this interview was conducted on May 18, 1980, Afghanistan was under Soviet occupation a little over six months. There was also the matter of fifty American hostages in Tehran and the U.S. elections heating up. Zia headed up a military coup that overthrew the legitimate elected government of Ali Bhutto and after staging a rather dubious trial, executed him, much to the shock and horror of the rest of the world. Zia would later die in a helicopter crash, also of dubious circumstances.

I think it would be fair to say that the instability of the region has a long history and having Atomic weapons capabilities makes the stomach turn just a bit faster as a result.

General Zia managed to conduct a one-on-one with Walter Cronkite and offered a few insights that, in hindsight may seem prophetic.

Gen. Zia: “What I am trying to say is, The United States Of America must see the true priorities in this region. If this region has any strategic significance in the minds of the United States citizens, if this region has any significance to the ultimate interests of the United States of America and the free world, then I am afraid the question of hostages should not be viewed on the emotional plain. I very strongly recommend, Mister Cronkite, that we should view the situation in a much bigger perspective. It is a global problem in my opinion. The lives of fifty American nationals is as dear and as valuable to me as it is to any United States citizen. But I say there are much greater things at stake at the present moment, and we should take out the emotional aspects of an election year or of the human aspects of this, this cannot be ignored, I must agree. But I think there are much greater stakes involved in this issue than only the lives of fifty nationals.”

So in retrospect, listening to this interview now and knowing our current situation with Afghanistan and our relationship with Pakistan, it would seem the current problems with the Taliban in the region have been more or less a work-in-progress the last 25 or so years.

Nothing is ever as it seems and nothing ever happens instantly.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: 21

PLAYS: 16

(French Army commanders - Dien Bien Phu - 1954 - Reality came as a shock)

Sometimes you wonder how we get into seemingly impossible situations that appear to have no ending in sight.

While running through my archive looking for tapes associated with our involvement in the Vietnam war, I ran across an earlier broadcast, from May 1954 - the occasion was the recent fall of the French garrison at Dien Bien Phu, which effectively ended the French involvement in that former colony. Edward R. Murrow, as part of his See It Now program put together a panel consisting of Senate Majority Leader William F. Knowland (R-California), Sir Robert Boothby, a conservative member of Parliament in Britain and a member of the De Gaulle cabinet in France. Togther they discussed, as a sort of postmortem examination of what went wrong and what was next.

Sir Robert Boothby: “When the French the other day implied and our French colleague implied just now that we’d rather left them out on a limb, left them to do this thing alone, they are I think to some extent to blame themselves. We’re speaking quite frankly, but they have made it plain for five years that they regarded this Indo-China as a domestic concern, this Indo-China business. They didn’t want intervention by anybody else, that they didn’t want to make it an international issue. They didn’t want our help or the help of the United States. And it was only three or four weeks that they made the request for help which was really too late.”

French Representative: “Maybe it was too late, but if I may interrupt here, as you have really put my country in question here. Yes, for five years we have asked for nothing. In five years we have lost 400,000 men. If China had not come into the picture we might not be where we are today. And after all, I think that . . well if I may say so, it wasn’t very kind of you to say what you just said. We have done our best as I told you. And . . well, if we had found all the help that we could have expected, perhaps we would not be here today, at least saying alas what we have to say”.

Maybe it's hindsight, but judging from Knowland's reaction to the situation, it almost feels prophetic that the U.S. was destined to get involved sooner rather than later - as was the case.

As I am hearing now about the potential domino effect of an U.S. pullout in the region, with the potential repercussions being an overthrow of the Pakistani government, a return to power of the Taliban in Afghanistan and, as Chris Matthews pointed out "all hell breaking loose" with nuclear weapons hanging in the balance - it's almost identical language to that being said some 55 years ago.

The stakes are different this time - but not by much.

All wars depress me, but this Afghanistan one in particular makes me want to scream. Why are we there? Theoretically, to hunt down Osama bin Laden and stop al Qaeda from using it as a base. But is al Qaeda still there? Is that likely to work? Is it even possible? And if it is possible, is it worth the cost?

Nice to see a high-ranking Democrat asking these questions, too:

The veteran chairman of the House Appropriations Committee posed a series of tough questions Thursday to his colleagues and the Obama administration about the wisdom of further U.S. engagement in that war-torn country.

Rep. David R. Obey , D-Wis., in a statement expressed significant skepticism about the prospects for success of any major effort to stabilize the country, either through additional U.S. troops or by a concerted effort to train more Afghan troops and improve the country’s governance and economy.

“The problem with increasing the number of troops is that we become the lightning rod, and our presence runs the risk of inciting more anti-American sentiment that can become a recruiting tool for the very forces we seek to curtail,” Obey said of one option President Obama is weighing.

“If any adjustment is made in U.S. troop levels, it would be much better if those troops were focused on the job of training Afghani troops and police to take on the job of securing the population and maintaining law and order,” he said. “But even there, we have to ask what is achievable. My understanding is that there have never been more than about 90,000 troops under the sway of the central government. Now we are told that the goal is to train up to 400,000 soldiers and police personnel. I think it is reasonable to ask whether that is a realistic and achievable goal.”

As for a policy bent on counter-insurgency and nation-building, Obey said, “We should be asking not what policy is theoretically the most intellectually coherent, but which policy is actually achievable given the only tools we have in the region; the Afghani and Pakistani governments. Is there sufficient leadership, popular support, and political will, not in the United States but in Afghanistan, necessary for effective governance to take hold? “

Equally important, he said, “Do we really have the tools to overcome language, culture, history and a 90 percent illiteracy rate to sufficiently transform such a country?”

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: 21

PLAYS: 9

(Secretary of State Dean Rusk, 1968 - Up to his eyeballs in it)

With the current situation in Afghanistan getting to the confrontation point, I was reminded of another situation the U.S. got into with Vietnam. Some four years after the infamous Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, questions were started to be raised over what was our plan there and how long was it going to take before we got out of there.

When an Aid request came along with a rumored increase of troop strength by 100,000-200,000, the Senate was starting to wane in their support, with J. William Fulbright being the most vocal during his questioning of Secretary of State Dean Rusk.

J. William Fulbright: “I do not mean to suggest of course, that I now agree with the course of action we are following in Vietnam. On the contrary, my doubts about the wisdom of this course of action have grown, and I am more than ever convinced that it is wrong, and that our present policies in Vietnam have had, and will have effects both abroad and at home that are nothing short of disastrous. Some members of this committee share my opinion. Others do not. But as I have said Mister Secretary, that while those of us who do not agree with our present policies in Vietnam, believe that it is our duty as United States Senators to give voice to the objections we feel in our minds and in our hearts.”

Unfortunately, it would grind on for another seven years before it came to an end.

Do the words deja-vu come to mind?