Afghanistan: Taliban Attacks in Kabul
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-09-14/afghanistan-taliban-attacks-kabul
Afghanistan's capital returned to relative calm today. Taliban militants launched a daylight attack on the U.S. Embassy in Kabul yesterday. They also struck the nearby NATO headquarters and other buildings, using grenades and automatic weapons. No embassy or NATO staff members were harmed. But seven Afghans lost their lives and at least 15 were injured. The attacks underscored concerns about the ability of Afghan forces to provide security for the nation as U.S. and other foreign troops prepare to withdraw. An update on Kabul and analysis of U.S. strategy to end the war.
Guests
Quil Lawrence
Kabul bureau chief for NPR.
Lawrence Korb
senior fellow at the Center for American Progress and former assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration.
James Kitfield
senior correspondent, National Journal.
Ambassador Ronald Neumann
president, The American Academy of Diplomacy; U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan from 2005-2007.
Related Items
Related Reading
The National Journal's James Kitfield examines how a decade of war has impacted America:
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Afghanistan and Vietnam: How could two landscapes so dissimilar resemble each other so much? "It's under control. We can't afford not to make this expenditure. We're winning!" (And now Generalissimo Petraeus heads the CIA, nothing ever changes. I didn't order Chile!)
Gives credence to the French adage: Plus ca change, plus la meme chose. Until patriarchal culture changes its focus from one of dominance, power, and control to one of collaboration and diplomacy, we can expect continued war and exploitation as the sanctioned choices to solving problems. Self defense is reasonable; but empire-building benefits the few while devastating the many. Extrication from this mess is quite a dilemma.
It is just obscene to wast American lives and resources in Afghanistan. We have no business being there. There are many countries around the world that might benefit from outside intervention but we have many issues at home that could have really benefited from the literally trillions of dollars we have waster there. I think it is historically clear that interventions of this type do not work and never have worked on a scale that large. Will the place fall apart or have lots more problems when we pull out. Sure. But this is the nature of any countries progress. They MUST work it out for themselves.
Isn't it possible that the reason we are in both Iraq and Pakistan, is to establish logistic bases for the eventual attack on Iran?
Warren
VA
Pakistan wants to maintain control over Afghanistan. Its ISI uses the Pashtun majority as its proxies, and imposes its will through the Taliban and also still through Hizb-e-Islami and the murderous misogynist, Gulbuddin Hekmartyar. We are not in the region simply to stop terrorists, but also to build and protect a gas transmission line and to mine the rare earth minerals that are abundent in that war torn nation.
What happened to the Bush war protesters?
Seems were getting ready to do some nation building in Libya!
Government only seeks to do more, doing less is never an option. Unfortunately.
It's funny how Diane says "we never learn!" Talk about projection. Some of us do in fact learn, but we can't make change when the decision-makers and their mouthpieces don't learn (it's not that they can't learn, it's just that the facts are really inconvenient). Now take Diane, for example - she can have really smart guests on, but she always goes back to her default setting at the end of each show. She could have Noam Chomsky on (oh, wait, I guess she can't - the NPR Chomsky boycott is still on) one day and agree with everything he said, but if her guest the next day was Donald Rumsfeld, she's agree with everything he said. It's not objectivity or neutrality, it's a lack of principle and any kind of deep analysis.
I wonder if the low turn out here today is because of the upset in the New York elections? it appears the campaign of knives launched by the democrat party is not going as planned.
@monte:
"What happened to the Bush war protesters?
Seems were getting ready to do some nation building in Libya!
Government only seeks to do more, doing less is never an option. Unfortunately."
The Bush War protesters are still here, protesting the continued waste of American lives and treasure in Iraq, which had nothing to do with the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Unlike Bush's Folly, Libya had an actual strong coalition of multinational military support for the opposition within Libya, which were in much greater numbers than Ghadaffi's regime.
And, now, all we have to do is turn over the frozen Libyan assets that is actually their money, leaving it up to them to build their nation as they see fit.
Bush's Iraq = $1 Trillion + over 4,500 American soldiers' lives + countless PTSD and physical injuries + countless soldiers' families left to pick up the pieces
Libyan Revolution = $1 Billion + absolutely no US casualties.
You do the math monte.
Sam,you assume way too much, if you want to know what I think Ron Paul is pretty much where I'm at on these issues.
Diane Rehm
I am sure you just cannot handle the truth about why we invaded Afghanistan.
These are from FBI (Vault)
http://www.TrumpTowels.com/FBI
This is hot potato. I am sure you just will not have enough courage to thouch this. We dare you.
Ivanka Trump
New York City, NY