Photo credit: @julesdwit.
A not-for-profit media organization supported by people like you.
Well, I see two big facts. The Taliban gets a lot of money. Obama is president. Obama is responsible for working with other countries to cut off the money getting to the Taliban. At this point, it seems like countries are moving away from working with Obama and the United States. Obama needs to do much better. Obama is president, time for him to step up.
Yes Peter, that's good old imperialist opinion not facts.
Taliban money also comes from:
5. President Obama not doing enough to stop it.
Jan from Massachusetts,
Taliban Money comes from :1. The global heroin trade- lot of poppies farmers in Afghanistan. The only way farmers can feed their families.
2. Extortion and rackets of international aide funds.
3. Including kidnappings and weapons and other smuggling.
4. And funding from private wealthy donors in the Persian Gulf.
Check out Leonard Lopates interview: of Rory Stewartwww.wnyc.org/shows/lopate/episodes/2009/05/21
Thanks, I understand the history, but the question is, who is funding the Taliban now??
ivan 9the taliban came after the soviet war, the taliban came after we abandoned afganistan the first time
Who is funding the Taliban??
graham gets it! too bad he didn't get it before 01/20/2009. now he just seems political
Overwhelming force does not win wars. It may win a battle. Didn't we learn this in Vietnam? Didn't learn that corrupt governments are more responsible for the insurgencies that they face and we face for that matter?
Lindsey Graham is just now learning that equipment, fire power, etc. doesn't win wars?
I thought the warlords were the corruption? Good morning Vietnam.
Obama doesn't seem to be discussing forming or strengthening an international coalition for his war of choice. I wonder why.
DID WE USE TO SUPPORT THE TALIBAN AGAINST THE RUSSIANS IN AFGHANISTAN?.
We have to pay off as many warlords as necessary to eliminate corruption.
the point of the afghanistan war is to prevent al qaida from gaining control of the pakistani nuclear arsenal
The point of the Afghanistan war is to prevent Al Qaida and ilk from gaining control of Pakistan nuclear arsenal
The enduring delusion of American foreign policy makers is that they believe all conflicts have a military solution. A military solution that imposes order on societies.
What seems to be not understood by policy makers is that in Afghanistan a military solution is impossible. More soldiers on the ground will not beat back Talibanism.A political resolution needs to be reach quickly in Afghanistan between all ethnic groups specifically the Pashtuns who have been left out of the political process. Without it the West-US- will see the Taliban movement turn into a war of national liberation against western invaders and occupiers.The consequence of more militarization will pull all of post Soviet Central Asian States into the conflict. The west could also find itself confronting Russia and China. American policy makers need to stop being myopic about global terrorism and Jehadis and see the larger picture.
The larger picture being that global Jehadis are a criminal cult which will burn it self out. That globalPolice actions may bring better result then western armies rampaging through out Asia.
The actions of western armies will not only lead to more generational hate toward the West but also the on going creation of Jehadi cults financed by the global narcotic trade which will washes up in the street of New York, London, Paris.
my first point is can't we fight the taliban with special forces, drones and a lighter foot print?the lesson I learned from afghanistan is this: in the 80's the citizens of the USA used the afghans to fight a proxy war with the soviets (as part of the cold war). after that war we walked away, making no attempt to rebuild a country we helped to destroy, leaving afghanistan a basket case. 11 years later we paid the price for that failed state with 4000 lives. we can't just walk away and think it's not our problem. every failed state is a threat
peter good points thanks
Martin and we trust the word of the taliban?
BRIAN - Ask if there is any chance that the Taliban would agree to deny Al Queda a sanctuary for future operations. If they will....then there is no reason to stay.
Military commentators, including Daniel Ellsberg (who released the Pentagon Papers), have said that for troops to win a military victory in Afghanistan, the United States would need to send in additional forces of perhaps several hundred thousand soldiers, not the 20-45 thousand soldiers President Obama seems poised to send. In other words, American forces in Afghanistan would need to be disproportionally higher then the combined Taliban and Al-Qaeda forces.
Why is President Obama considering a force size, that by many accounts, is a recipe for losing?
The United States, under the leadership of President Obama, would need to use disproportionate force to win President Obama’s war of choice in Afghanistan. If President Obama used disproportionate force, would this be moral?
On the radio show On Point with Tom Ashbrook, it was announced on the September 21 show that it is almost certain that Nato troops, including Canadian, British and German troops, will be pulling out of Afghanistan at the same time that the United States is planning on increasing troop levels there. This was reported as an erosion of international support for war in Afghanistan. Please ask Mr. Kaplan why President Obama is loosing international support for his war plans. It feels like President Obama is going in alone.
Also, in recent weeks, Mr. Kaplan’s colleagues at the Slate Political Gabfest have suggested that Afghanistan could be President Obama’s Vietnam. Does Mr. Kaplan agree?
Email addresses are required but never displayed.
Brian Lehrer leads the conversation about what matters most now in local and national politics, our own communities and our lives.
Subscribe on iTunes
Brian Lehrer Weekend: Mad Men's Matt Weiner, Ira Glass & Sarah Koenig, '04 Food
WNYC 93.9 FM and AM 820 are New York's flagship public radio
stations, broadcasting the finest programs from NPR and PRI, as well as a wide range of award-winning local
programming. WNYC is a division of
New York Public Radio.