DOWNLOADS: (211)

PLAYS: (1857)

Embed

MSNBC's Joe Scarborough, a former Republican congressman, has a new country song calling for the U.S. to bring home troops sent into war after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

"In an endless war / Tell me please how many more have to die / Before my sweet boy comes home," Scarborough sings in "Reason to Believe."

The accompanying music video was created by JAM, a production company owned by Scarborough and Morning Joe co-host Mika Brzezinski. It was released by Sony Records.

"It's critical that we remember the heroes of 9/11 and those who are still fighting in an endless war," Scarborough told The Huffington Post. "They need to come home. It's time."

But Scarborough wasn't always against the war effort.

"I'm waiting to hear the words 'I was wrong' from some of the world's most elite journalists, politicians and Hollywood types," the MSNBC host said in April 2003. "I just wonder, who's going to be the first elitist to show the character to say: 'Hey, America, guess what? I was wrong'? Maybe the White House will get an apology, first, from the New York Times' Maureen Dowd. Now, Ms. Dowd mocked the morality of this war..."

"Maybe disgraced commentators and politicians alike, like Daschle, Jimmy Carter, Dennis Kucinich, and all those others, will step forward tonight and show the content of their character by simply admitting what we know already: that their wartime predictions were arrogant, they were misguided and they were dead wrong. Maybe, just maybe, these self-anointed critics will learn from their mistakes. But I doubt it. After all, we don't call them 'elitists' for nothing."

DOWNLOADS: (439)

PLAYS: (1190)

Embed

The year has just begun, and already Fox News' Sean Hannity is telling the story of how Christians are being persecuted in the Arab world.

Hannity observed that a holy war may be "brewing" in the Middle East, as he reported on the New Year's Eve bombing of a Christian church in Egypt.

Cliff May, a notorious neoconservative and creator of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, was a little more excited about the prediction than Hannity.

"In your intro you said a holy war is brewing," May began. "It is not brewing, it is taking place."

"Christians and other religious and ethnic minorities are being not just discriminated, but persecuted in Egypt and throughout the broader Middle East," he added.

"Do you think we are headed for a modern day religious war in the Middle East?" Hannity asked.

"The war that is being fought now, the great global conflict in the world, from Iraq to Afghanistan to Gaza, this is one war and it is a religious war," May explained. "Not because we want it to be, but because al Qaeda and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and various other radical Islamists and jihadists, they say it's a religious war. That's what a jihad means."

"People forget jihad equals holy war," Hannity concluded.

It was President George W. Bush who first invoked images of a holy war in the Middle East, when he suggested soon after Sept. 11, 2001 that the US was on a "crusade" in the region.

Years later, GQ magazine uncovered top-secret military briefings prepared by former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld for President George W. Bush that included Bible passages.

"Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand," was the quote from Ephesians that appeared on a March 2003 briefing cover sheet along with a picture of a US tank in Iraq.

In 2009, a US church provided Bibles printed in the Pashtu and Dari languages, for American soldiers to give to Afghan citizens. Al Jazeera obtained video of a military pastor urging service members to "hunt people for Jesus."

Trijicon Inc., a defense contractor, was discovered last Janurary to have been placing scriptural references on military gun sights used in Iraq and Afghanistan for years. The company was forced to provide the Pentagon with kits to remove the Bible codes.

DOWNLOADS: (286)

PLAYS: (514)

Embed

It's looking less and less likely that a serious troop withdrawal from Afghanistan will happen in 2011.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said Sunday that 2014 was the more realistic date for a drawdown.

"I think in summer of 2011 we can bring some troops home but we're going to need a substantial number of troops in Afghanistan past that," Graham told ABC's Christiane Amanpour.

"2014 is the right date to talk about. That's when Karzai suggests that Afghans will be in the lead and I'm very pleased to hear President Obama talk about 2014," he said.

"What I want to talk about is winning. Having the ability to stabilize Afghanistan and be a good partner with the United States forever. That means we're going to need military force for quite a while, post 2014 when the Afghans hopefully get in the lead," Graham continued.

"It will be great to have a couple of air bases there in perpetuity to help the Afghans send the right signal to the regions," he added.

At the same time Obama announced last year that he was sending 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan, he also announced that a drawdown would begin in the summer of 2011.

"Taken together, these additional American and international troops will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011," Obama said in a speech.

After winning back the House in November's midterm elections, Republicans signaled that the president's 2011 deadline would be a target.

"Republican Representative Buck McKeon, who was all but certain to be the new chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, signaled that the party would ensure that US forces have the 'time" to achieve their goals," AFP reported.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen said last week that NATO should endorse Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai's 2014 timetable for withdrawal.

Last Wednesday, the Obama administration began to de-emphasize the 2011 date.

DOWNLOADS: (640)

PLAYS: (928)

Embed

One influential Republican senator has changed his mind on President Barack Obama's plan begin withdrawing troops from Afghanistan in the summer of 2011.

After a recent trip to the region, Sen. Lindsey Graham returned to say that he believes some troops could be removed in July 2011.

"After this trip, I think we can transition next summer some areas of Afghanistan to Afghan control," Graham told CBS' Bob Schieffer Sunday.

"I see progress I had not seen before. I see a scenario if things continue to develop the way they are that certain areas of Afghanistan can be transitioned to Afghan control and we could remove some troops safely without undermining the overall war mission," he said.

"But at the end of the day the president has to let the Afghan people, the regional players know, the American people know that we're not going to leave until we're successful. But I do see a path forward next summer to transition in certain areas of Afghanistan but we will need substantial troops well past July of 2011 to get this right," continued Graham.

Only three weeks ago, Graham told CNN that he didn't think it would be possible to begin transitioning troops out of Afghanistan that soon.

On the same program, however, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina worried that the Afghan forces and central government may not be ready to assume the necessary responsibilities within a year.

"[G]enerally speaking, this time next summer, we're still going to be engaged in one hell of a fight," Graham told CNN. "We're going to need every troop we have today, I think, still in Afghanistan next year."

According to Graham, it will be clear by the end of this year where things stand in Afghanistan.

"If, by December, we're not showing some progress, we're in trouble," he said. "And the question is: what is progress? Without some benchmarks and measurements, it's going to be hard to sell to the American people a continued involvement in Afghanistan."

Graham's change in attitude comes only days after a new poll shows that nearly 6 in 10 Americans oppose the war in Afghanistan.

DOWNLOADS: (676)

PLAYS: (1492)

Embed

Republican strategist and former Mike Huckabee and Kathleen Harris adviser Ed Rollins threw RNC Chairman Michael Steele under the bus on Face the Nation this weekend.

Here's more from Think Progress -- GOP strategist says RNC Chairman Michael Steele is a ‘disaster.’:

Michael Steele’s term as Republican National Committee Chairman has been riddled with controversial verbal missteps that have roused the scorn of his Republican colleagues. His most recent gaffe in mischaracterizing the Afghanistan war prompted an outcry among prominent Republicans who called for his ouster. Remarking on the appearance of “Shadow RNC” Chairman Ed Gillespie over Steele as the RNC mouthpiece, Face the Nation’s Bob Schieffer asked GOP strategist Ed Rollins today whether the GOP should “do something” about Steele. Rollins doubled-down on his dismissal of Steele’s efficacy, calling him a “disaster” who has “failed miserably” in his mission:

SCHIEFFER: But Ed Rollins, I want to ask you about this. I mean quite frankly, no offense to Ed Gillespie who I have been dealing with and know to be a good guy for years and years and years but he wouldn’t be here unless if the chairman of the Republican Party currently Michael Steele was willing to go on television. But he’s so immersed in controversy that he’s kind of in a bunker these days. Are Republicans going to have to do something about Michael Steele?

ROLLINS: Well, there’s no time. Obviously he’s been a disaster. You have three men on this show — not me, but the other three — who have all been party chairmen and very distinguished party chairmen. Michael Steele has failed miserably in the things you’re supposed to do — raise money and basically go out and articulate the message. It’s not going to matter though. In 11 weeks from now, what he says and does in the next 11 weeks is not going to matter.

So nice to see Republicans saying that what the head of the RNC does doesn't matter. Michael Steele is the gift that keeps on giving.

DOWNLOADS: (597)

PLAYS: (903)

Embed

The man suspected of leaking US military secrets about the Afghanistan war to WikiLeaks may have committed the crimes because he felt abused by the military, a CNN investigation found Monday.

Private Bradley Manning is being held at Quantico Marine Base on charges that he leaked a video of Afghan civilians being killed at the hands of the US military. Manning is also considered a person of interest in the probe into the war logs leak.

CNN's Chris Lawrence looked into Manning's past to try to get some idea why the soldier might have leaked sensitive war documents.

At the age of 13, Manning moved to Wales where his friends say he was bullied but stood up for himself. Even as a young man, he loved computers. "He was doing hard coding as in programming," said James Kirkpatrick, one of Manning's prep school friends. "Hard coding, sort of the most complicated stuff at the ages of 14, 15. He was a very clever guy."

CNN tracked down a former lover going by the pseudonym "Tim" that Manning met at a gay bar in Washington, DC.

"I would say that it started out as a physical relationship that turned into a friendship," Tim told Lawrence.

Tim talked to Manning about the positive experience coming from being gay in the military. He explained to Manning about the discipline he had learned while in service.

"He was very hurt as a person. He felt verbally, emotionally abused because of his sexuality," he said. "I thought maybe the Army could do for him what it had done to me."

Manning joined the military and found a very different experience. "Manning was verbally abused right from boot camp," reported Lawrence.

Tim explained that Manning had gotten into another relationship after joining the military that made him realize that the "don't ask, don't tell" policy was wrong. "Through him, Brad was able to discover that it was wrong, the discrimination. And how 'Don't ask, Don't tell' for example sort of created an atmosphere in which that could happen because of silence, you're required silence."

Manning took a stand on his Facebook page. He supported the repeal of California's ban on same-sex marriage and ending the "Don't ask, Don't tell" law.

"In my opinion, I feel sexuality, his own sexuality and what has happened to him in the military coupled with the policy of the military played a significant role and the reason to why he did what he did," explained Tim.

DOWNLOADS: (582)

PLAYS: (1285)

Embed

MSNBC's Rachel Maddow has spent the last week embedded with US troops in Afghanistan and has discovered that a withdrawal deadline is absolutely necessary to complete the mission.

Maddow talked to NBC's Ann Curry Tuesday after touring the city of Kandahar.

"We've been hearing for a long time that the Kandahar offensive has been delayed," said Maddow. "It's been pushed back. That's the common wisdom, I think, in American circles. It's very clear here in Afghanistan that it's very much under way. It hasn't been delayed. It just doesn't look like a war movie."

"What you're looking at is setting up Afghan governance and there's a sense of urgency to do that because of the American deadline to start leaving next summer," she explained.

"There have been a lot of critics who have said that deadline doesn't make sense in terms of military strategy. But I think that's only true if you think of war, this kind of war, as if it's some kind of D-Day every day. It's really not like that. Counterinsurgency doesn't look like that," Maddow continued.

"The point of this counterinsurgency strategy is to set up an Afghan government so Afghanistan is essentially hardened against the Taliban coming back into power and against Afghanistan again linking up with these extremist groups," she said.

"The deadline is not for military strategy in pure military terms. The deadline is so the Afghan government feels like they've really got to get their act together and stand up and get it done."

"I have to tell you that the counterinsurgency doctrine may not work. It may not work no matter what we do to try to try to set up the Afghan government here, but it definitely won't work without a deadline at least in Kandahar, not based on what I've seen after this latest embedding," Maddow told Curry.

Critics have called the 2011 deadline to begin withdrawing troops a mistake.

"I'm concerned about the perception of our friends and our enemies as well as the people in Afghanistan, as to the depth of our commitment," Sen. John McCain told ABC's Jake Tapper Sunday.

"I know enough about what strategy and tactics are about. If you tell the enemy that you’re leaving on a date certain, unequivocally, then that enemy will wait until you leave," he said.

Sen. Joe Lieberman also hopes that as the deadline nears Gen. David Petraeus and Obama will change their minds.

"The President has come some distance now in the last couple of weeks and clarified that. Whatever we do in July of 2011 will be based on conditions on the ground at the time," he told Fox News' Major Garrett Sunday.

"You know, the President made the right decision last December that America has a vital, national security interest on the line here in Afghanistan. We've got to win it. And therefore, you don't put that on a timeline," said Lieberman.

DOWNLOADS: (163)

PLAYS: (231)

Embed

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) cast doubt Sunday on the future of the head of the Republican Party following controversial comments about the war in Afghanistan.

At a Thursday fundraiser, RNC Chairman Michael Steele was caught on video saying that the Afghanistan war was a "war of Obama's choosing" and probably a "lost cause."

ABC's Jake Tapper spoke to McCain Sunday about Steele's remarks. "Republicans such as Congressman Tom Cole, William Kristol, Liz Cheney, have said that Michael Steele needs to resign because of those comments. Do you think a chairman of the Republican National Committee can be effective if he thinks that the war in Afghanistan is unwinnable as Steele seems to think?" asked Tapper.

"I think those statements are wildly inaccurate, and there's no excuse for them," said McCain.

"The fact is I believe Mr. Steele is going to have to assess if he can still lead the Republican Party as chairman of the Republican National Committee and make an appropriate decision," he said.

DOWNLOADS: (468)

PLAYS: (602)

Embed

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) called on President Barack Obama and the top general in Afghanistan, Gen. David Petraeus, to "loosen" the rules of engagement put in place to lessen civilian casualties.

Fox News reported:

Sen. Joe Lieberman on Sunday urged Gen. David Petraeus to change the rules of engagement "as soon as possible" for U.S. troops in Afghanistan, saying the strict policy has "hurt morale" among American military.

The Connecticut independent senator, speaking from Kabul on "Fox News Sunday," said the incoming commander told him he was "committed" to reviewing the rules. Those rules, put in place by outgoing Gen. Stanley McChrystal, are classified but generally aim to limit civilian casualties by prohibiting troops from firing unless they're shot at -- or from launching bomb or artillery attacks when civilians are near the target.

Lieberman acknowledged that civilian casualties damage the counterinsurgency campaign U.S.-led troops are trying to wage, but said the policy has also put American troops in harm's way.

"Ultimately, we've got to be concerned about the safety of our American troops here," Lieberman said. He said he's heard stories about troops having to wait too long to get air support when under fire. "We can't let that happen."

DOWNLOADS: (388)

PLAYS: (569)

Embed

The chairman of the Republican Party suggested last week that the Afghanistan war was a "war of Obama's choosing" but Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) doesn't think that's necessarily a bad thing for Republicans.

At a Republican Party fundraiser Thursday, Chairman Michael Steele told supporters that the war was probably a "lost cause." This caused many hawkish Republicans to question Steele's future as chairman. Liz Cheney, Bill Kristol and Rep. Tom Cole all called for Steele to resign.

Fox News' Major Garrett asked Lieberman Sunday if Steele's remarks "undermined the ability of the Republican Party to effectively join and continue to participate in this debate on Afghanistan."

"No, I think we had a kind of positive boomerang effect here," answered Lieberman.

"There was such a stern reaction from Republican leaders to Michael Steele's comments, which has I say he retracted that I think you now -- I think the Republican Party gives me encouragement to believe they'll take the high road and not make a partisan political fight out of a war in Afghanistan or try to take advantage politically of a war that will get tough," said Lieberman.

"The reaction from some of the leading Republican spokespeople to me is heartening, which is no. We have to win in Afghanistan. It's important to America's security and freedom. If we lose here, if we pull out, it will energize the radical Islamist, extremist groups, the terrorist groups around the world," he said.