Charlie Rose

BENEZRAA  07/04/2011 09:09 AM Report

ADDENDUM TO THE PRIOR COMMENT IN LIGHT OF THE FRESHLY RECENT TERROR ATTACK AT THE INTERCONTINENTAL HOTEL IN KABUL

Various reports have attributed the freshly recent terror attack at the Intercontinental Hotel in Kabul to either the Haqqani network or the Taliban or both, which must draw attention to the knotty issues of internecine conflicts that challenge the Taliban, the Haqqani network, and Afghanistan.

If the Haqqani network was in fact involved in the attack at the hotel, then in order to bring the Haqqni network into the Afghan Government and transitively to encourage the Taliban to stand down and resolve it's own internecine issues in favor of the Karzai Government, then first the Haqqani network must do the same.

BENEZRAA  06/26/2011 12:55 AM Report

MAKING SENSE OF THE LIMITED WITHDRAWL FROM AFGHANISTAN

It is true that the Military must again do more with less. This will affect operations in the East, according to General Keane. The East is where the Haqqani Network is dominant, according to Vali Nasr.

The Haqqani Network is linked to Pakistan and is also linked to Afghan President Karzai, who believes the Haqqani Network may be persuaded to join the Afghan Government and therefore ally against holdout Taliban.

It is understandable in light of the death of Osama bin Laden and in light of the present dissonance between the USA and Pakistan that "soft" US diplomacy that is not overly soft may work in favor of improved US relations with both Islamabad and Kabul and perhaps between Kabul and Islamabad as well.

JohnGelles  06/25/2011 09:34 AM Report

The comments of Gen. Jack Keane & Prof. Vali Nasr were sound and appreciated.

I believe the President ought to link our jobless recovery to asymmetrical warfare and to Middle East and Global Diplomacy, as follows:

a. If we raised the production, of robots for IED demolition and flying drone cover night and day, to very, very great numbers, we could create an economic and job-providing machine that served our civilians with money in circulation and our soldiers with deserved weaponry.

b. If we discussed anti-terrorism warfare with the great nuclear powered residents on earth in Russia, China and anywhere allies may be found, to assure these common powers that global peace is our objective, we might make that objective obvious and prevent them entering a robotic arms race. Some sharing of the burden of preventing smaller wars in Africa and elsewhere might even result from such discussions over time.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  06/25/2011 03:45 AM Report

The Afghanistan narrative was get Osama Bin Laden. This was done last month. While doing this it appears someone (everyone at the State Department is on message: 'NOT THE TOP PEOPLE') in Pakistan was holding Osama Bin Laden in protective custody.

So . . . the narrative is radically different now for BOTH Afghanistan and Pakistan which might suggest we need to do something different.

The real source of this issue is the Saudis--they provided the radical schools, most of the 9/11 attackers and probably most all of the money. The Taliban did provide land for training.

So the Taliban are bad but not $120 billion/100,000 men bad.

(By the way, it blows my mind that we have to fight around a country that harvests opium in the Spring and marijuana in the Fall and whose soldiers have little education and love to get stoned.) TEN YEARS OF TRAINING & A SURGE!

SharkswithfrikingLazers  06/24/2011 04:00 PM Report

Sorry Charlie these guys were a bit light on facts and figures--great on opinion though.

If you want to really get into this issue click on this link to C-SPAN and watch our Senate go to town with/on Hiliary Clinton:

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Goalsand

I learned that the Northern Alliance is working with India and this makes Pakistan nervous. So this India-Pakistan-Afghanistan triangle is a real juggling act.

I learned the Northern Alliance, with our CIA, is/was a great force to remove the Taliban.

I learned that 100,000 troops costs us $120 billion--$1.2 million a troop.

I learned that Mexico is a bigger threat to us than Afghanistan.

I learned that Pakistan is not worthy of the $2.7 billion we give them and they need to be taken to the financial woodshed.

DavLev  06/24/2011 12:03 PM Report

Both interviewed are right. Obama is sending more boys/and girls, to their deaths or injuries..by this outrageous withdrawal. I mean come on. Had we used the same tactics with Hitler..we would today all be speaking Deitch..waving to the Reich flag. We vacated Dunkirk...with the hope that we would return victorious. Remember the saying, "I shall return". Obama just doesnt have a clue about running this country's economy OR foreign policy. As McCain said...about Iraq, with a date certain to withdraw..why should the enemy cave in? Same applies here. Okay, withdraw, but dont announce 9it publicly. The Taliban talking, come on. Why should they? Pakistan/India relations..their problem, which has been resolved in the past. What are our goals in Afghanistan/Iraq? We killed Bin Ladin and Saddam. The Arabs have been fighting each other for almost 2,000 years. So whats new? 1 trillion dollars wasted, while the budget deficit is a major problem. Colin Powell said that we should win our wars. This was a good intervieew for Charlie.

who didnt (this time) play Sec of State or Defense.

Obaama is straddling the fence..which will only lead to

our seat getting burned.

REMant  06/24/2011 11:15 AM Report

Well, of course Adm Mullen's and Gen Keane's belief that more troops is safer is not entirely true. More troops are a bigger target, as well, and they have become so, as they did in Iraq, especially in the east. As in Iraq, the nation-builders want to build a nation. The president said he doesn't want to do that. He said we can't afford it, and in the opinion of many this is a sufficient reason. Assuming they are thinking strategically at all, these gentleman, have yet to tell us what the importance of Afghanistan is that warrants this degree of investment. When they are done in Afghanistan, will they want to move into Pakistan? Does Gen Keane really believe that al Qaeda needs Afghanistan to destabilize Pakistan?