The NATO Summit And Securing Afghanistan’s Future
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-05-21/nato-summit-and-securing-afghanistan%E2%80%99s-future
The U.S. hosted world leaders over the weekend at the G-8 summit at Camp David and the ongoing NATO summit in Chicago, President Obama's hometown. Two intertwined issues topped the agendas - Europe's economic turmoil and the war in Afghanistan. As the E.U. continues to struggle with financial crises and political upheaval at home, there's little appetite for looking outward. Who will pay the annual $4 billion bill for security in Afghanistan after U.S. and NATO troops withdraw remains an open question. Diane and her guests discuss the role of the U.S. and its allies in Afghanistan and the future of shared security.
Guests
Douglas Ollivant
senior national security fellow, the New America Foundation; former National Security Council director for Iraq; recently retired Army officer.
Michael Hirsh
chief correspondent, National Journal magazine; author of "At War with Ourselves: Why America Is Squandering its Chance to Build a Better World."
James Goldgeier
dean, School of International Service, American University; former director of Russian affairs for the National Security Council; author of "Not Whether but When: The U.S. Decision to Enlarge NATO."
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Agree completely with other listener re: get out now. That IS responsible. Why are we worried about this process? A withdrawal is going to be criticized, no matter what. Save U.S. and Afghan lives now. Our leaders are drunk on these wars and the idea of 'Superpower'. We need to have a country that is working to strengthen itself internally and quit wasting treasure and human lives on this worthless conflict.
AGREED with Caller! Take care of our country AT HOME. Get out now. End Superpower idea of our country and just become a responsible nation in the world community.
We are bombing a country living in the Stone Age,back to the Stone Age. Gee,who could guess the outcome?
Oh wait,there`s more. We put an Oil Man as Afghan President.Ha Ha Ha...We fly cash in by day,he flies it out by night.Ha Ha Ha.
"Kuala Lumpur — It’s official; George W Bush is a war criminal.
In what is the first ever conviction of its kind anywhere in the world, the former US President and seven key members of his administration were yesterday (Fri) found guilty of war crimes.
Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and their legal advisers Alberto Gonzales, David Addington, William Haynes, Jay Bybee and John Yoo were tried in absentia in Malaysia.
The trial held in Kuala Lumpur heard harrowing witness accounts from victims of torture who suffered at the hands of US soldiers and contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan".
And people think these issues will go away magically? Will the attempt to convert Muslims to Christians be forgiven or forgotten?
There is an elephant in the room here.
Everyone agrees that the Afghan war is "unpopular" -- that our domestic affairs need attention -- but that the easiest appropriations to get out of Congress are military expenditures!
Why is this? Answer -- lobbyists for the military industrial multinationals. They effectively bribe the politicians with money to win elections who wind up in their pockets. The US system is hopelessly corrupted. If anyone believe underwear bombers (which it is revealed often have direct ties to the CIA (as did Osama Bin Laden, BTW)) are seem phoney, you're not alone. All attempts by the US establishment to be make to make the (phoney) case that the US needs to "defend" itself.
The least you could expect from Rehm's discussion is a mention of the crucial driver of the madness -- war profiteering. Will it get mentioned? I very much doubt it. To speak the truth at a time like this is a revolutionary act. The US needs real leadership, not irresponsible bullies.
Korea. Vietnam. Afghanistan. Iraq. Billions of dollars thrown away (much of it into the coffers of the super-rich). Thousands of deaths. Destruction.
We never learn from history. The indications are that we never will. We will continue down the same path as long as the world exists.
I was very disappointed with the comments regarding the comparison of the current protests in Chicago and 1968. First, there were 10,000 or more protestors in 68, the largest crowd this weekend was 3,000. Second, in 1968 the protest was exclusively the Vietnam War. The protests this weekend were more similar to OWS with a hodgepodge of many different issues including Robin Hood Tax, Medicare, Unions, 99% tax, etc. So NATO in Afghanistan was just one of many. Finally, about 90% of the protestors marched peacfully and took direction from the police. About 300-400 were black-bloc or other anarchist types that tried to break police lines, scuffle, and vandalize. There were only 45 arrests and the police were tolerant beyond any reasonable expectation in the face of obscene and beligerant provocations. I can't imagine that any politician would be influenced by these protests. So there is really no comparison.
I would also like to recommend two books by Andrew Bacevich. "The Limits of Power" and "The New American Militarism". These are very good and balanced discussions on the political concensus behind the use of military force from Wilson to the present. Your guest only touched on the notions of national interest and humanitarian interventions. We need to be honest when asking the question about intervention. Are humanitarian reasons alone ever sufficient to justify military action? What constitutes 'national interest'? Should we only respond to attacks? Who is accountable for drones and 'special operations'? When do they amount to war?
Emotional responses are heard but not that effective for resolution. Outside of the political arena, there is the logistics of getting all of the equipment and personnel out safely.
That time frame is probably close to a year, especially with routes compromised.
I would like to hear a logistics & equipment specialist consulted, as well. We have been there 10 years and I'm sure we have a trash pile that we will leave behind.
Then, there is the rebuilding period unless we want to deal with having left a huge territory open to the anarchist.
Either way, we will deal with it.
"MarcM wrote:
I was very disappointed with the comments regarding the comparison of the current protests in Chicago and 1968. First, there were 10,000 or more protestors in 68, the largest crowd this weekend was 3,000. Second, in 1968 the protest was exclusively the Vietnam War. The protests this weekend were more similar to OWS with a hodgepodge of many different issues including Robin Hood Tax, Medicare, Unions, 99% tax, etc. So NATO in Afghanistan was just one of many. Finally, about 90% of the protestors marched peacfully and took direction from the police. About 300-400 were black-bloc or other anarchist types that tried to break police lines, scuffle, and vandalize. There were only 45 arrests and the police were tolerant beyond any reasonable expectation in the face of obscene and beligerant provocations. I can't imagine that any politician would be influenced by these protests. So there is really no comparison.
May 21, 2012 - 4:07 pm"
The policitians weren't influenced in 1968 either.
Thanks for all those valuable Stats, did you happen to hear how many of the "Anarchist Types" were arrested and prosecuted for their Felonies? I never have.
Or were they off-duty cops who always manage to get away after they provide the provocations that allow the cops to arrest, abuse and discredit the peaceful Protesters?
Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com