When all is said and done and the judgment of history is rendered, Obama’s presidency may well be compared to LBJ’s, who got sucked down the rabbit hole of Viet Nam. But he won’t have something like the Civil Rights & Voting Rights Acts to balance the equation with. TARP and Cash for Clunkers don’t rank up there with the Great Society. Obama should keep in mind that Afghanistan is where empires go to die, and have for thousands of years.

“Lose Afghanistan?” To whom, the Taliban? What is their strategic significance to the US or the west? What is the mission in Afghanistan? What are the tangible goals?

Is this a face saving mission?

On Point Producer(s),

What the heck is the problem with the comment section? First you close it overnight to eliminate discussion of the topic before the show begins, now I find comments closed as the program is in progress.

This tight fisted behavior concerning the comment section is throwing a wet blanket on what I consider one of the most enjoyable aspects of the show.

Please lighten up!

I just wonder what is after Afghanistan. Will we have had enough, or will we end up somewhere else after this?

I’m not a pacifist or a peacenik, but I can’t fathom the rationale for what we are doing in this sad corner of the world. Will this stop terrorism? Will we definitively destroy or disable Al Qaeda? Will Afghanistan become a western style democracy with a legitimate infrastructure? Will this stabilize Pakistan?

My heart weeps for anyone who loses or has lost a loved one in this place.

I understand the Vietnam analogy, but what about the Korea analogy – where we faced an enemy whose support network was located across the border in China? When MacArthur wanted to cross the Yalu River and go after it, Truman fired him.

You wanna talk vacum?
Send in 35,000 quickly and then pull them out
Wouldn’t that create one helluva vacum?
you don’t fight religous extremism with militarism. We keep making more martyrs everyday we are there.

Helen,

Should we send troops to Sudan, Somalia, Saudi Arabia, The Netherlands, France, and all the other places that harbor angry Muslims who might wish us harm? Your answer is just too simple. We can’t fight the whole world, and no, we really don’t have enough money to subdue everyone who doesn’t like us.

Ho Chi Minh said “The American People will help me win the War”

The Vietnam war was a totally different war compared to this Terror War.

The Vietnamese people were convinced that Communism was the answer for their country.

Majority of Vietnamese opposed the American involvement in Southeast Asia. The American people were opposed to the Vietnam war.

The Vietnam War was the war of numbers. Robert McNamara fought the war with Numbers. from the number of troops, the number of bombs to be drop,
the number of military aid to South Vietnamese government etc etc.

Afghanistan War is the true war against Terror it was not Iraq or Iran. IT IS AFGHANISTAN

Where is Bin Laden in Afghanistan?
Where are the majority of terrorist trained? Afghanistan.
Where are the Nuclear Weapons? right across the border in Pakistan
What if the Pakistani government collapsed?
Who will take over the Nukes? Taliban.

We should BE IN AFGHANISTAN!!! The terrorist are in Afghanistan. Not in Iraq or Iran

Pakistani people are already helping us. In order to stop them terror is to help the Pakistani Army.

9 years We wasted our time in Iraq. This is now the time
to really destroy terrorism if we don’t destroy them now.

We will see another 9/11.
The American people should be educated about Where are the Terrorist.

Well, They are in Afghanistan and Hindu Kush province of Pakistan planning another 9/11 and Mumbai attacked like incident against innocent people.

We leave Afghanistan WE LOST THE WAR IN TERROR.

When looking just at his accomplishments, Obama has one-upped his incompetent predecessor. In one year, he has driven us far more into debt and greatly increased our role in an unpopular (and I’d argue, stupid) war. I can’t fault him for the environment or health care as there’s little to point to (though single payer and legislation to curb costs seems to have disappeared). But the chief Nobel Lauriat seems to be on track for the worst president in modern times.

But he does give a great speech.

Why is this discussion happening today instead of tomorrow after the Presdent’s speech? I get so damn weary of conjecture.

Work with tribes? How would a foreigner fare in an American city- say Chicago- with all it’s corruption and know who to trust? Now add the danger of being in a warzone, a language barrier, religous and cultural barriers

STOP BLAMING OBAMA BLAME BUSH FOR THE WAR.

How can American people so naive that Obama inherited this war and the great recession. Are you guys hypocrites?

Send troops find Bin Laden and the Taliban.

Remember Obama inherited this problems from George Bush. Bush gave us this War,Enron Recession,unemployment and economic collapsed.

Obama is helping us

9 years We wasted our time in Iraq. This is now the time
to really destroy terrorism if we don’t destroy them now.

You can’t destroy terrorism or the ideology that fuels. You can only control it through good intelligence and what is known as police work.

There are always going to be a Taliban, or some other group.

We can’t afford this kind military action anymore. Were going broke and what are we defending? A country that has a rising unemployment rate and huge health care crisis.

STOP BLAMING OBAMA BLAME BUSH FOR THE WAR.

It’s Obama’s war now. He owns it. Bush, Cheney, and his cabinet from the 2001 period have a lot ot answer for.
I for one think they committed criminal acts, but that’s not what this program is about.

Obama is making a huge mistake here. He is also not going to raise any taxes to pay for this debacle. You can’t fight wars without paying for it and borrowing will be our downfall.

I know I studied Psychological warfare in College.
I know it is costing more BLAME Bush HE DIVERTED ALL MILITARY ACTION TO IRAQ INSTEAD OF FINDING BIN LADEN FIRST IN “AFGHANSITAN”. He overthrow Saddam. probably just finishing his father’s job after the Gulf War 1.

The General who requested the troops said he is asking for troops to protect the Afghan people in the city or markets. He even talked to the people in what do they need in order for the Americans to win the war in Terror

The Afganistan people said we need protection our towns and cities from Taliban. So, We can go on with our everyday lives.

Yes We can’t destroy Terrorism but we can stop them from BUILDING A COUNTRY FOR TERRORIST LIKE AFGHANISTAN

DO YOU PREFER AFGHANISTAN HOME OF THE TERROR NETWORK
PLANNING ANOTHER 9/11 OR MUMBAI.

just imagine Millions of Terrorist living in Afghanistan
if we don’t stop now. We Caress!!! yap just imagine dismantling all those nuclear warhead in Pakistan and sending all to subways,federal buildings etc etc in America to destroy us all.

We can’t afford this military action anymore is BS?
IF we can’t afford it WHY ARE WE AT WAR IN IRAQ for almost 9 years.

It was never Obama’s war it will never will

That would be in the History books but different from naive people like you.

If he withdrew NOW what will the American troops will say to him.

What happened to all those 3,000 victims of 9/11
the 35,000 wounded troops, the 8,000 soldiers who died in Iraq.

What will you say to them that the war is over because we cannot afford them!

Let their be Dignity to those soldiers who died that tried to save us from terror.

akilez I have a friend who’s ex-wife worked on reconstruction projects for years in Afghanistan.
The country is corrupt, extremely corrupt. Everyone has their hand out for a bribe.

One thing you forgot to mention are the tribal areas which have never been governable and are ruled by warlords and tribal leaders. Afghanistan has never had a centralized government and seems to me it never will.

Your screaming fire, predicting a country full of terrorist and so on. Bottom line is we can’t afford this. The other stat that is interesting, all Americans are many times more likely to be struck by lightning than a terrorist attack. You have a better chance of being killed by a drunk driver then a terrorist.

Oh for Pete’s sake, it Obama’s war because he’s the president now.

Vietnam was started by Kennedy and ended up as Johnson’s and Nixon’s war, why, because they were the presidents and created policy that effected the war.

What part of this history do you not understand?

By the way akilez you mention history.
One could argue, very successfully, that Afghanistan is fools errand. That is, it is the place that empires go to die.

For Pete’s sake the history will not put Obama name.
Who Started the war!

It will be George W. Bush and George Bush that’s for Pete sake. Of course he inherited the war that his war now but in the History Books he DID NOT START the WAR

The Vietnam war didn’t start with Kennedy. Duh!!!
What history that you miss Putney Swope. It started in 1955 before Kennedy was President.

Corrupt! Afghanistan is corrupt I wonder WHY ARE WE IN GREAT RECESSION NOW BECAUSE WALL STREET IS CORRUPT
OHH DID YOU FORGET ABOUT LEGAL CORRUPTION IN AMERICA OR FOR SHORT THE FLEECING OF AMERICA

Please corruption is America

Akilez,

What will Afghanistan look like after an American “Victory”?

Also, will this “Victory” end the threat of terrorism against us?

Yap I rarely hit by Lighting.

They only strike once but it LEAVES LONG LASTING WOUND IN OUR HEARTS THAT IS UNCURABLE FOR THE REST OF OUR LIVES. JUST LIKE 9/11

DON’T TELL ME YOU DON’T CRY WHEN YOU SEE THE 2 TOWERS FALLING AND THAT WAS 8 YEARS AGO.

TELL THAT good old story to the people of New York

why ask me a question that you and me will never now and the war is not yet over.

Afghanistan was the same 5,000 years ago primitive but NO Terrorist

WHAT VICTORY? IF PEOPLE LIKE YOU IS AGAINST VICTORY THERE WILL BE NO VICTORY.

WE ARE IN AGHANISTAN IS TO CREATE A GOVERNMENT TO STOP TERROR FROM CREATING ITSELF.

In one year, he has driven us far more into debt.

Yeah, I remember all the shreiking over GWB’s record debt during the economic expansion earlier this decade.

Grow up and read what economists are saying about debt to GDP, and what is needed to keep an inherited recession from becoming another Depression: It ain’t goverment austerity.

In 1955 the French were at war the Vietminh the predecessor of the Vietcong. Vietnam was French colony in 1955. The US did send money and military equipment but it was Frances war, not Americas.

Bush started the war, Obama is now expanding it and time will tell if his policies are right.

What I am saying is we can’t afford this anymore.
We have been in there for 9 years and counting.
There is no nice happy ending here, none.
I’m a realist, your damned if you stay and damned if you leave. The question is which poison do we want to swallow?

excuse me Obama never expanded the war We Are already there. Expanded. is that another hyprocritical answer

This is his first time he will send troops and he will explain it tonight and even sent back more troops that he is going to deploy.

compared to 300,000 troops sent by your Bush.

How do you know we can’t afford it anymore.
I guess you sign the Pay check for the government.
the poison was already swallowed on 9.11.01

French started the Vietnam war Vietmin means Northern Army and Vietcong means guerilla army both are different but same intent to destroy Imperialism

How can you trust these guys to run a war on the other side of the globe in the name of US security when they can’t even keep track of the guest list to a state dinner? I’m sorry but we get nothing but incompetence from this administration so far.

I didn’t know the President is responsible for checking the guest list for his parties.

I thought that was the job of the Secret service and White house PR manager.

Did you see the movie “Deep Impact”? The movie was made before Obama was planning to run for the Presidency.

The President was Black just like All Dooms Day movie that were maid in the past. Including the Prediction of Nostradamus,Bible and the Maya that a Great black president will lead this world for a better tomorrow.

Pretty weak, Natalie.

It is 1:22M.
I can’t believe what I am listenening to!! Does this woman have any IDEAS to combat all of the historically evolved problems she is talking about?! She is speaking from 2009 and not considering the evolusiton of the problem and tries to make it sound as if all of the problems on her closed minded list began and escalated in 2009. This is the worse choice of for NPR in the twently years I have been listening. There is no consideration for what the other side may be and what may become of our increased forces in the future. She is tripping herself up all over the place in her long winded, one sided outlook on the story. Her cynical tone is highly uncalled for.I am turning this off!
The “I don’t think” comments are really not enlightening me. Shame on you NPR. I am really disappointed in your choice of broadcast. I am sure I could hear a wateed-sown version of this on FOX news!

Ok so it’s too much to expect them to get that right?! You certainly set the bar low for the guy. I didn’t even mention all the other bumbling that’s gone on: economy, bailouts, stress tests, unemployment, Geithner, Summers, Asia trip, Afghanistan, dollar, picking fights with Fox, healthcare “reform”, finanicial industry “reform”, immigration “reform”, and on and on. Tell me one thing of value this group has accomplished that gives you confidence in their ability to execute in Afghanistan.

I did not vote for Bush, akilez, apparently you only read what you want to and make up your own ideas based on a fantasy. If you read my comment correctly I called Bush and company criminals. I would hardly call that an endorsement.

Your right the Vietminh were the North Vietnamese regulars.
The Vietcong were the insurgents who were pretty much wiped out after the Tet offensive in 1968.
The French were in Vietnam before WW2. It was occupied by the Japanese during WW2. The French took control after and Vietnamese communist started a war of independence. You seem to lack a lot of knowledge in this history, and given that you also name fictional movies as some sort of evidence to your arguments I have to think you kind don’t know what your on about.

Obama has been carrying on Bush’s agenda in Afghanistan but he owns it. He’s the president, it’s called taking responsibility for ones action. He’s sending another 30 thousand troops there, in my book that’s called escalating the conflict.

I seem to remember that before the US involvement in Vietnam it was called The First Indochina War or the Franco-Vietnamese War.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Indochina_War

It’s time to get out of Afghanistan, that’s my opinion.
This will be a huge mistake. However now that Obama has set this into motion, I hope our military and NATO does succeed even though thousands of years of history are not in our favor.

“How can you trust these guys to run a war on the other side of the globe in the name of US security when they can’t even keep track of the guest list to a state dinner? I’m sorry but we get nothing but incompetence from this administration so far”

Stay off the rush, and fox’s its rotting your mind or what’s left. try thinking for yourself than taking point by point of right-wing hacks talking points.

Your comment tells us all what type of person you are blahhhhh.

Obama is stuck between a rock and hard place no matter what he doesn people like the above will parrot whatever the republican party tells them. But it looks sending 30k more troops like his gerenal wants is not goign to help. Much better to get out and spend the money 1million a person on our fellow people. Healthcare would be great.

1/3 (300 billion)+ of the health care cost will be going to 30k troops over ten years and that if they don’t increase the troops again.

In a previous post, I argued that Obama has greatly increased our national debt. I’d go further and say that having a deficit of trillions for the next 10 years will have a terrible impact on the US. Someone responded “Grow up and read what economists are saying about debt to GDP” This person also implied that government austerity would have driven a recession into a depression. Finally, there was some comment on GWB’s record debt.

All fair comments (I took the “grow up” comment as a compliment on my open-mindedness). But a few points on this.

GWB was a dope. I called him incompetent in the original comment, but why get picky. However, that he screwed up on so many fronts is not a good defense for others screwing up.

Obama inherited a mess that was not his fault. But by most measures I can think of, other than the stock market, he’s made things worse. Unemployment, yearly deficits, a polarized congress, housing foreclosures, spending and casualties on the Iraq war, growth in the war in Afghanistan, are all measurably worse. On the other hand, he’s improved the image of the US (not insignificant), seems to care about the environment and other than all the Wall Street types around him, seems to listen to smart people. Health care’s another disappointment, but at least he took a shot. On balance, I think he’s done more to damage this country in only one year than just about any other president. He’s got the time to turn it around, but this Afghanistan move is not a good sign.

As far as the deficit’s impact. The interest on the national debt for 09 is about 500B. So, just the interest on it is approaching the budget of the pentagon. It’s hard to find economists these days who think this is not a tremendous burden on us and future generations.

At some point, Obama needs to take responsibility for what’s going on and stop blaming everything on the previous administration. This doesn’t mean he wasn’t given a terrible situation. But if his efforts have made things worse, do a mea culpa and apologize (who am I kidding – he’s a politician like the rest). Well then at least change direction and stop spending money and lives like they’re disposable.

To quote Senator Kerry: how can you ask a person to be the last person to die for a mistake, especially when that war has been, is, and will forever be his predecessor’s war, who clearly relished the “tough guy” image that he thought his mindless “stay the course” strategy imparted to him?

Nice try defending the indefensible. I hear the same points from Pelosi, Reid and Gibbs everyday. It’s easy to see who wrote the little red book you quote from.

It is clear that Obama is trying to establish his own tough guy image, similar to his knee-jerk statement about invading Pakistan made during the campaign. He’s trying desperately to set himself and the party up for elections in 12 and 10 respectively. This is about politics pure and simple and it stinks.

What? After 8 years, the reason the Karzai government remains corrupt and inept and that the Afghani police and army are ineffective, despite their personnel being brave in the face of fire, the reason for this mess is that the U.S. hadn’t sent 30,000 more troops. Ridiculous. So if a shortfall of 30,000 troops is not the cause of the problem, then 30,000 also is not going to be the solution.

Blame Bill Clinton, he had ben laden in our sights. All he had to do was to give the order to shoot. I wonder if he had, what would our situation be like today.

Natalie it always is.

Your tone indicates that you lean towards the right.

If your a republican the last time I looked it seemed that they were doing a fair amount of politicking themselves.

I loath both parties myself, however the republicans have a history in our modern politics that is pretty bad, from John Birch to Glenn Beck and that bulbous a$$ who smokes cigars and pops pills.

[...] [...]

President Obama should listen to his V.P. Joe Biden and get us out of Afghanistan.

Opposition to this most recent act of incompetence by Obama is bipartisan. You’re the one mired in politiking.

In Afghanistan, we now are using 250,000 of our troops to fight a rag-tag bunch of 20,000. Now, that’s about 12.5 (ours) to 1(theirs). When the US brings in 30,000 more, it will be 14 (ours) to 1(theirs). So…another 1.5 troops to their 1 will bring us something we’ll call victory!?!?! And, if we do have some level of success, will that be achieved to the point of beginning to bring home troops in a little over a year?

Our objectives in Afghanistan (which I have never heard stated clearly, not even during the President’s speech, tonight) are not even remotely reasonable. Will we work with a highly corrupt government to bring about positive change in that country? (Let’s see, considering they need roads, bridges, schools, business diversity, and a whole lot more, I’m sure giving a corrupt government our complete support will effect the changes we, they, and the rest of the world wants to see, there.) Will we unify a people, “winning their hearts and minds,” who don’t really want us there, and who have existed in factions of tribes for well over 1,000 years? (Sure, the US will single-handedly, abruptly change the course of history from ancient civilization through now!) Are we going to fight “terrorism” in Afghanistan? (Well, considering al Qaeda is in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, even France and Germany, etc., …not bloody likely; and, we will not fight their ways of recruitment and indoctrination with military troops.)

And, in terms of “victory,” what will that look like? Are we going to fight al Qaeda with our troops around the world? Are we going to root out Osama bin Laden in Pakistan? Are we going to bring all of those tribes in Afghanistan together with their government in one big, happy, peace-loving democracy?

I found the President’s speech tonight at West Point, in terms of specificity toward goals in Afghanistan, to be weak, purely and simply. I found nothing compelling in his words. He talked about fighting terrorism; he mentioned righting the wrongs of 9-11; he said the world is with us; he spoke of our greatness in unity. All of this sounds grand, but Obama never seemed to veer too far from the stump speech approach to rallying people; and, especially considering that stumping is his strong-suit, he failed.

Brett, good stuff as always. No one will explain the goal other than “to get Al Qaeda”. It is truly baffling.

Also, there is NO WAY the 1151pm comment is actually from Louise. It is an imposter. I can tell because it nowhere contains the phrase “failed presidency”!

As far as my plea to the producers to liberalize the availability of the comment section… I just don’t see the downside of MORE conversation about a good topic. Innapropriate comments (anti-semitic?) can and should always be deleted. Love the show, love to engage w/others about the topics.

Brett, even counting all NATO/ISAF forces, we don’t have anything like 250,000 troops in Afghanistan.

Bret as of July of last year we had 68,000 American troops posted to Afghanistan. I think another 10 thousand or so have been sent over since and Obama is sending over another 30 thousand.

It’s a lot, but it’s not 250 thousand so is the number also including Iraq?

Obama’s speech was pretty middle of the road. He is trying to appease all sides. I doubt 18 months will be enough time to turn this mess around. Personally I think we will still be there in 10 years.

Bret,

are you referring to the amount of contractor and troops/mercs under them added to those numbers?

Cause those numbers are not normally reported nor there deaths since there not officially part of the military.

Putney, Michael,

Yeah, sorry, guys, I was having a senior moment ; …anyway, my data transgressions aside, the point is still that 30,000 more from the US won’t change the ratios enough to increase a likelihood of success.