tv Washington Journal 08192021 CSPAN August 19, 2021 6:59am-10:03am EDT
>> a discussion on the collapse of afghanistan to the taliban and its implication. later, representative of massachusetts talks about u.s. efforts to relocate afghans due to the taliban takeover live at 2:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government, co-funded by these television companies and more, including charter communications. >> broadband is a force for empowerment. that is why charter has invested billions in building infrastructure, upgrading technology, empowering opportunity in communities big and small. charter is connecting us. >> charter communications supports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> coming up this morning we
discussed covid-19 vaccination efforts with the former acting cdc director. and later the future of afghanistan following the taliban's takeover. "washington journal" is next. ♪ ♪ host: good morning, it's thursday, august 19, 2020 one. yesterday top leadership of the pentagon attended to the planning around afghanistan and said the focus is on the evacuating as many allies and after and citizens as possible and as the airlift continues this morning we are spending our first hour hearing from veterans about the fall of kabul, the war effort in afghanistan and what it all means for the military and those who have bought. the phone lines are split this way this morning. veterans of the war in his stand can call in at (202) 748-8000.
other war veterans, (202) 748-8001. special line for family members of veterans, (202) 748-8002. you can also send us a text this morning, that number, (202) 748-8003. if you do, please include your name and where you are from. otherwise, catch up with us on social media, @cspanwj at twitter, and facebook.com/c-span. we are talking mostly to veterans and veterans family members this morning. you can go ahead and start calling it now as we show you the headlines from this morning's papers on the latest from here in washington, d.c. in reaction to afghanistan, pentagon defending landing and pledges to save every american in afghanistan. this was yesterday. general mark really discussing the intelligence surrounding the taliban takeover of afghanistan.
[video clip] >> let me make a comment on intelligence. i've seen all over the news rapid collapse stories. the intelligence clearly indicated multiple scenarios were possible. one of those was an outright taliban takeover following a rapid collapse of the afghan security forces and the government. another was a civil war. a third was a negotiated settlement. however, the timeframe of a rapid collapse, that was widely estimated in, following the departure. there was nothing that i or anyone else saw that indicated a collapse of this army in this government in 11 days. central command submitted a
variety of lands that were briefed and approved by the joint chiefs of staff, secretary of defense, and president. they were coordinated, synchronized, and rehearsed to deal with these various scenarios. one of those contingencies is what we are executing right now. host: it was yesterday that abc news aired its interview with president biden, george stephanopoulos talking with the president about his intelligence failures as well. here is a part of that conversation. [video clip] >> was the intelligence wrong or did you downplay it? >> there was no consensus. looking at the intelligence reports they said it was more likely to be sometime by the end of the year. >> you said flat out that it's
highly unlikely the taliban would take over. >> yeah, the question was whether or not, the idea that the taliban would takeover was premised on the notion that the, that somehow the 300,000 troops we had trained in it whipped were going to just collapse and give up. nobody anticipated that. host: president biden in his interview with abc news. we are talking with you this morning, mostly with veterans and family members of veterans, asking her your view as we continue to watch the fallout in the airlift out of the kabul airport. wondering how veterans are feeling this morning. especially those who served in the 20 year war in afghanistan. that number, (202) 748-8000. the line for other veterans, (202) 748-8001. a line family members of veterans, (202) 748-8002.
one of the headlines as news organizations check in with veterans groups and individual veterans this week in the wake of the all, veterans view collapse with anguish, rage, and relief. one veteran said -- i can't help but think about what a waste of was, after all the blood and treasure it ends like this. of significance this week as well, the v.a. setting up a special resource page for veterans who may be struggling with events in afghanistan. pointing veterans to various groups around the country. we just want to hear from veterans around the country as well about what you are feeling this week as you watch images out of afghanistan and kabul. mechanicsburg, pennsylvania is first. the line for other war veterans. good morning morning, greg.
caller: good morning, mr. mcardle. you have been less partisan than usual this week. hopefully that's an indication that the mainstream media is realizing they have enabled the defeat of donald trump. this would not have happened donald trump had been reelected. he was not reelected because of the mainstream media, they decided he shouldn't be reelected. time for the mainstream media to get back to their job, to be suspicious and critical of every decision made by government. that leads me to say that from now on, what should happen as a result of i was in vietnam, i wasn't there in 75, i was there in 1971 and 19 ebony to. what i saw in saigon in 1975i saw again this week. so, joe biden deserves to be
impeached. he deserves whatever negative stuff anybody wants to say and the mainstream media should now demand, there should be interviews with lloyd austin and with general milley until they tell everybody everything. from now on, when we go into a mission, we go into a country, we go in with a mission. restricted, we accomplish, we get out. meaning the rules of engagement have to be much different. we fought vietnam and we fought afghanistan as if we were doing a police action in detroit or los angeles. no, no. we are not. we are over there to win something, to do something and then get out. host: more indications about these conference hearings. capitol hill, house democrats
seeking answers early next week on the collapse in afghanistan. the times noting how nancy pelosi of the house foreign affairs committee will hear testimony from the highest level administration officials. they have asked for antony blinken and lloyd austin specifically to testify on the loss of kabul and the hasty evacuation from the city's airport. that story, we will find out more exactly when those will be and we will air those in their entirety when they happen on c's and networks ronald in oklahoma on the line for other war veterans. how are you feeling this week? guest: thanks for -- caller: how are you doing? thanks for c-span. i'm just a little bit confused and perplexed here. i'm trying to really understand, you know, the people in afghanistan. also uzbekistan, to jicha stan,
pakistan. they lived under this taliban mentality for thousands of years and the united states of america , only what, 275 years old, coming over there to try to tell them how to live their lives, their culture? for 1000 years? i'm a little bit confused of how donald j. trump, the biggest man who lied about an election and had an insurrection in his own country try to justify sending soldiers over to another country that has been there for 1000 years? host: which war did you serve in? caller: i was in the persian gulf, desert storm desert shield. host: what were your feelings about going over there at that time? caller: the same.
just confused. how are we going to send our soldiers to another country, these countries, even in europe, vietnam, korea, all those countries have their own cultures. they have been there for thousands of years. our culture has only been 275 years. host: got your point. oklahoma, you mentioned vietnam on that issue. katie h news, the headline from the news station out of texas, "this is our vietnam." local veterans react withdrawal from afghanistan. "this week, watching the aftermath of the u.s. troop withdrawal makes us grateful, the goldstar families getting hit the most, carrying a heavy burden.
to me this is a hard one to swallow when people casually say was it worth it. i've spoken to fellow battle buddies and i know what the vietnam vets feel like now. there's a sense that afghanistan was a struggle, if you are there one time or five times. stories like that from around the country this week as veterans react to the fall of kabul. we have a special line specifically for veterans of the war in afghanistan. if you are a veteran of another era, (202) 748-8001. family memories of veterans, (202) 748-8002. george, bristol tennessee, served in afghanistan. when were you there? caller: no, that's a wrong number, but i do have a comment to make. i was in vietnam and 71.
host: does this remind you of the fall of saigon, george? caller: in lots of ways, it certainly does. we had no business being there to start with, the majority of those people didn't even want us there. we cannot go to another country and tell these people what to do , but at least the south vietnamese would fight. these people here, 300,000 of the same troops over 20 years and 75,000 people come up and they throw their guns down? wait just a moment, we cannot be a part of their culture. they throw down their guns and run and begged these people not to kill them. it makes no sense. host: bill, albany, georgia, what does the fall of afghanistan mean for the u.s.
military and its standing in the world? caller: the military should be proud of what they did. the thing is though, everybody knew that we were going to get out of afghanistan sooner or later in this should have been taken care of years ago. trump denied the visas for thousands and thousands of afghani's that could have come over waiting for the end. he said the timeline was up to biden. stick to it or start fighting again. biden had no choice. this is the way it is. they knew the timeline was coming up. everybody knew that. everyone knew that biden wanted to get out of afghanistan. they should have gotten everybody out beforehand and trump would have had the visas ready for people when he should have, but he denied visas for thousands upon thousands of afghani's because he didn't want foreigners in the united states. so, it's basically trump's fault. pompeo, whatever his name is,
the secretary of state who negotiated the timeline here with the taliban, so you know, the veterans should not have any , any thought of being defeated or anything. they should be proud of what they did and we are not trying to be in the business of nationbuilding anymore. especially with the religious countries that have a whole different ideology than we do. host: bill in georgia there. the numbers, the estimates, 10,000 to 15,000 american citizens still in afghanistan. pentagon officials pledging to get them all out. perhaps as many as 65,000 afghan allies are trying to get out. the pledge has been to get as many of them out as possible. yesterday defense secretary lloyd austin acknowledged the evacuation numbers now at the airport are not where they need to be.
[video clip] >> we continue to work with state department officials on the ground to approve the procedures, you know, the entry points, to make sure we and speed up the process of aiding people in and moving them onward. so, the state is deploying more counselor officers to be able to help with that. as i stated earlier, we are going to push more military assistance down to the entry points to facilitate these effort. but we are really working hard to get as many people through as possible and, frankly, it's obvious we are not close to where we want to be in terms of getting the numbers through, so we are going to work that 24 hours per day, seven days per week and we are going to get everyone that week and possibly evacuate, evacuated.
i will do that as long as we possibly can until the clock runs out or we run out of capability. host: that was secretary lloyd austin yesterday. phone calls from veterans this morning. afghan war veterans, (202) 748-8000. other war veterans, (202) 748-8001. family members of veterans, (202) 748-8002. what do you think this all means for the standing of the u.s. military in the world? from our text messaging service, ross in california, vietnam vet, saying it's disgusting to see how the administration handled the debacle, trying to go into countries that hate us. you know that nothing good comes from this but death and debt. this is from harry in pennsylvania, we have the same military that we had during my time in the vietnam era.
there is no evolution or success either. the line for veterans, this is william out of houston, texas. good morning, how are you doing? caller: all of you armchair -- first of all, thank you, c-span. all of you armchair quarterbacks, shut up. there wasn't a war in afghanistan. video more? get out there. if this was a border there would have been 250,000 troops out there. they were getting killed every day, watching that body bag every week. guest: when were you at -- host: when were you in vietnam? caller: 68, 69, 70, 71. retail -- retired. five tours. i would say this to any armchair
order back out there. you are sitting in a compound on the green zone. where are the patrols that? send your sons over there to sit in the desert on top of a bunch of hot rocks trying to kill an idea. you are soft as marshmallows, calling and talking about what you would do. you are supposed to be quiet and follow orders. look how much chaos they cause. 55,000 plus. host: that was william. 20,000 wounded, the numbers are from the department of defense on that line for veterans. keith out of fort belfour.
when were you in afghanistan? caller: thank you for the visibility during the conversation. i'm currently serving, my comments reflect my personal views. i served for 15 months of my life. growing up as a young officer in afghanistan. like what secretary austen said, this is deeply personal for my generation of serving officers. one side of it, a lot of us look to the future in the future threats, future competitors. we think it could be a good shift in our strategic attention to look at the future, however we also reflected on the 20 years of sacrifice that our brothers and sisters have contributed to the service of our nation.
in this time of difficulty for a lot of veterans who are still serving, as well as those who have served, we will continue what we did downrange. we will continue to look after each other. a lot of mixed emotions out there, but i want to reflect and make sure that my fellow veterans, your service matters. we were there for each other and that's what matters in the end. to your left, to your right, we took care of each other and continued taking care of each other during this difficult time . for ourselves and for our nation. host: talking about battle buddies to your left and right, being there for each other, did you feel that the pentagon leadership was there for you in afghanistan should mark did you feel like the larger american public was there for you in afghanistan? caller: i personally feel that
we have the support of our country, our leadership. on a personal level i think that there were things that perhaps we observed on the ground in afghanistan that perhaps did not take its way to the top. i would say that a lot of the people who have served over 20 years and have worked with the afghan military, the surprise that a lot of people are revealing after the afghan national security forces fell in 11 days, i would say that's not her ticket only surprising if you have worked with afghan soldiers in the past. i'm not blaming individual soldiers. there are definitely soldiers on their side that tried their best [no audio] . [no audio] but given the -- but given the [no audio] they are very different from us and to try to build them in our
image, perhaps we should have thought through that a lot more before undertaking such an effort. host: pete, on the standing of the u.s. military in the world today, for someone who is serving in unit or, what has this pullout and the chaos of the pullout and discussions around whether we believe allies behind, what does that due to the standing of the u.s. military in the world? what does a 20 year effort where we end up with the taliban back in charge of afghanistan, what does it do to the standing of the u.s. military in the world? caller: i'm very guilty of following social media. i think you really need to look at some of the glimmers of hope. some of the glimmers of humanity that still come and where you see them. i would point to pictures of a
small afghan child being comforted in the uniform of an airman while being evacuated out. images of the reach flight leaving couple, 600 and 40 afghan evacuees coming out. those are the things that demonstrate the strength of the u.s. military, our leadership in the world and what people look for when they think of the u.s. military. there are some questions that need to be answered and we need to work through it for ourselves and with our closest partners and allies as we moved to future challenges for the country. host: the image of the child under the coat we are showing you now, why that image in particular? caller: i mean, just talk to evette. when we were on patrol, getting shot at, getting rocketed,
getting mortared, you would twice, you wouldn't think twice about offering aid and assistance to children. we saw them, we got to know them and it was deeply personal. just like the secretary and the chairman said, deep personal. we see them in our children today. i just don't see a lot of other countries that would take it that personally. make that human connection area -- connection. we criticize our military. there is probably a lot criticize. however, we are far and above very well connected with our ability to kind of empathize with the people that we have to operate alongside and, and, and in the country that we are deployed to. host: before you go, if you
don't mind, one more west and. we have had afghanistan war veterans call in. as someone who has been over there, you see it in the papers, was it worth it. is that an ok question to ask a veteran who has been over there? how do you feel about that russian? -- that question? caller: everybody is entitled to their own opinion. i certainly have mine and i respect everybody that has their own opinions on the wars that we undertake. be it iraqi, afghanistan, vietnam, world war ii. every conflict, everybody is entitled to their own opinion and we should have a national dialogue. i think i would welcome a conversation alongside my fellow service members, veterans, and it's important to have a
dialogue. it's important for civilian military relations. host: appreciate all your time this morning. thank you for calling any and sharing all your thoughts on this. caller: thank you, bye. host: phone line for veterans, sarah, family members, good morning. caller: i had a three family members in afghanistan. i feel like, you know, we threw away 20 years. the planning, there was like no plan b worst-case scenario. they should have been planning to getting people out back in april. not to go back to far, but when donald trump negotiated with the taliban i was like, i thought we never negotiate with terrorists. it was up to the afghan government to do that and us to back up that government.
and then joe biden, apparently doesn't understand logistics and should have been moving out translators back in april. the most stunning thing was joe biden. we see him as a highest catholic christian and he has absolutely no empathy for the people of afghanistan. which is stunning, completely stunning, mind blowing to me. my family is military. i had six family members in vietnam. one of my family members fought in kosovo, afghanistan, two tours in a rack. another cousin's daughter was in a rack also. -- in iraq also. i feel like strategically that was a good piece of land to keep.
we have been in japan for 75 years. we have been in germany for 75 years. we have an opium heroin problem here and we could oversee that a bit and now that is going to go gangbusters and we are going to lose more of our young people to that. and then we threatening iran, russia, china, north korea? we are a joke now. afghanistan is between pakistan and iran. strategically i would think that would be something we should have had a hold of. host: sarah, out of new hampshire this morning. another story papers about what's happening in communities around the country and you have seen when he of these stories this week, veterans rushing to help interpreters in their escape. many veterans feeling the u.s. betrayed afghan allies.
story therefrom open the wall street journal," -- they are from wall street journal," congress and -- from "the wall street journal," about the interpreters and allies left behind. frank, oklahoma, veteran of not the afghanistan war. caller: vietnam, 11th cavalry. i was staff. host: what do you think about the u.s. standing in the world, the u.s. military standing in the world immediately after the fall of saigon and today after the fall of kabul? caller: this is no more or less gut wrenching from john kerry in vietnam, getting us pulled out
of their prematurely in favor of the chinese communists. this is the same thing except biden is the one that's kowtowing to the chinese communists. trump had made arrangements for air support for the afghan army and biden withdrew that. that is why they abandoned their posts and gave up. they didn't have any protection from america this last week. it's just, it's just a ration of do do, if you will pardon the expression. host: lee, washington, family member of a veteran. good morning. caller: my dad served in vietnam. everyone calling and in making statements about vietnam and
afghanistan, it's totally alive, false. i wanted to touch on something these callers are talking about, they seem to be cognizant of the area when they don't really know about the area or the region and it's really sad to hear. trump would not have handled this any differently. he's the reason we had insurrection. these people seem to forget all about that. that's what i have to say. host: why do you bristle at the comparisons between vietnam and afghanistan? caller: for one, my mother was a comfort women -- woman. vietnamese woman -- women were used that way. that was no comparison to what we saw enough to stand. we didn't see service members having offspring with afghan women. that's one comment i want to make. there's no way that war is like what happened in afghanistan. we could have pulled out
differently, strategically wise, but trump really wasn't a good leader. he put the nation more in the spotlight, we are more divided than ever. host: is joe biden a good leader? caller: he is a good leader. he is, he's working on certain things that trump neglected to do. that's the problem. all the people calling in want to be divisive about this because they all stick to trump and anyone who sticks to biden as a democrat or a liberal, we are suddenly considered communists when we are not. people need to look at what communism became. especially in russia. it was basically aristocracy, and then the people that created the poor. communism is nothing like liberalism. a lot of these people don't even know geographic history. the caller mentioned india and pakistan borders but she didn't speak on the issues that created
that. hamad karzai, we prop him up in afghanistan. you have iraq, the lies that we created, the regime take over. once they took out saddam hussein, come on, people forget the republicans are the ones that controlled that part of the decade. there was the problem there before obama. host: that is lee out of washington. you mentioned hamid karzai. a picture from the negotiations now happening on arming a new government and how the taliban will lead afghanistan. this picture from the taliban, releasing the photo from yesterday, hamid karzai there with a taliban delegation and former presidential candidate abdullah abdullah, meeting in
kabul to talk about the leadership of that country. interesting photo released by the taliban. you are talking about joe biden with that interview with abc news, george stephanopoulos, anti-of lips of that are going around, including this one about president biden discussing the immediate chaos that followed. here is a bit more from that interview from yesterday. [video clip] >> you don't think that this could have been handled better in any way? no mistakes? >> i don't think it could have been handled better in any way. we will go back in hindsight in look but the idea that we could have gotten out without chaos ensuing, i don't know how that happens, i don't know how that happens. >> for you that was always priced into the decision? >> yes. host: the exclusive was aired yesterday.
callie is next, family member of veterans. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: doing all right. caller: i was upset that i didn't get to speak with the man yesterday about pakistan's involvement when you had him on. host: we rescheduled him, saturday morning, 9:00 to 10:00. caller: that's great. my son, i just talked to him the other day about this. he doesn't talk about his time very much, but he was one of the ones originally, the first group in there, was an army ranger. he parachuted into the kandahar airport in october of 2001 after spending the night in the hospital with his wife who just had a baby. so, i get angry when i hear people talking about how we shouldn't ever have been over
there. the main reason we went over there was to go find osama bin laden which, thankfully, we did. he is upset. he didn't really specify why. he just said he didn't trust what was going on. i feel a lot of it is intelligence failure. we should have known that taliban was making deals with all of these provincial governors and mayors and whatever for month since trump made his deal with them. there's a lot of corruption. what were they going to do? they knew we were leaving, that we were planning to leave. but i'm, i'm just upset, i'm ashamed about how people are reacting to taking refugees. it's really awful. they are not all the same and it worries me that our country is turning into tribes, basically.
so, i cry for my son, what he went through. i didn't sleep the whole time he was over there. he went over there for a good purpose. it really, like i said, it makes me angry when they say we should never have been over there. host: as the mother of a son who is over there, how would you answer this headline from "usa today," talking about what you should and shouldn't say to a war veteran right now? what advice would you give? caller: he was the whole time he was in the army, he was special forces in went to a lot of places besides afghanistan that he wasn't allowed to talk about. so, it's hard to talk to him, because he can't on some things. but i do know why he went over there and he, you know, he had a good job before he enlisted.
you know, he was vice president of a brokerage firm and he, after he went and enlisted, it just makes me angry, it really makes me angry that people say we should never have been over there and it makes me angry when everybody thinks that all the afghans over there are ignorant in their ideology. that it's backwards. there are plenty of people over there who are intelligent, you know? karen, good people. we have a lot of our soldiers over there whose lives saved by some of these afghans. host: you mentioned him going over right after his wife had a child. with that grandchild, what will you tell that grandchild one day about afghanistan and about that grandchild's father's service? caller: i'm proud of my son for going over there and i'm ashamed
of what's going on right now read i really am. i don't blame president biden. i do think there was an intelligence favor -- failure. we pulled out too quickly and without a good plan and i think we are leaving a lot of people over there that we shouldn't be leaving. or we will be. i mean it sounds like they are changing it and they are going to extend past the 31st. host: that was part of that interview as well. caller: i can't believe that they would put a timetable on something like that over something like this. it's ridiculous. host: thank you for the call and thank you for your son as well. gary is next on the line for other war veterans. go ahead. caller: yes, how are you doing, john?
i'm a little confused about the trump supporters. last week they were complaining that joe biden had opened borders on the southern border and that he was letting everyone into fast. now they complain he's not bringing them over from afghanistan fast enough. have they forgotten it was donald trump who put a ban on muslim immigrants? donald trump negotiated this deal. people giving that lecture in which they bragged there was nothing joe biden could do. that the deal was an ink. when barack obama was president, the man who runs afghanistan today was in prison. he was in prison in pakistan. it was the trump administration that said to let him out. to the people that keep talking about the equipment left behind, the reason the equipment was left hind was because they had 300,000 soldiers in uniform over
there. if you took the equipment, they would be complained -- complaining that they stripped them of everything they had. it's ironic how trump supporters call up and then are so critical but not one time has c-span show that picture of donald trump and pompeo meeting with the taliban. if obama had done that? if obama had met with a terrorist organization, the trump supporters would crucify him. the hypocrisy is -- the hypocrisy of trump supporters is never ending. host: that's atlanta, georgia this morning. you mentioned the man in charge of afghanistan the man who was in charge up through sunday, the deposed afghan president who fled the country as the taliban surrounded the capital, he has taken refuge in the united arab emirate. the former foreign minister said
yesterday that they welcomed him and his family, whose whereabouts had been unknown. the 72-year-old said that he had been negotiating with the taliban on creating an inclusive and representative government but was forced to flee after the militants entered the capital. this is marie on the line for other war veterans out of north carolina. good morning. caller: i have so many comments, i have heard so many things. i am a veteran of desert storm. i'm thankful to the president for having the courage to pull the united states out of afghanistan. the people who are calling in asking how soldiers are supposed to feel? we serve the country, we serve the people of the united states. we are not involved in national military policy. all we can do is have an opinion on how we felt when we were in
the situation. but actually, we don't make military policy and the people over us have not shared the details of what's going on at their level. it started under the bush administration 20 years later this country is still over there. $1 trillion later, this country has spent. and then the people that we were supposed to train to be the military for afghanistan, they disappear in one day. when i saw them close down the air force base one day and the next day there were news reports that the people didn't know how to start the generator? it was no doubt in my mind. we put forth a gallant effort in afghanistan, but ultimately the people of afghanistan have to rule themselves and we need to step back and let them do it. i appreciate what our government has done. we didn't have a military
mission. there may be a lot of people over there suffering. women that may not be able to go to college. there might be a lot of humanitarian crisis there. but what was the military mission? we should not send soldiers, airmen, and marines over to do something that can be done by nonmilitary related agencies. host: that was marie out of north carolina. james is a family member of a veteran out of aberdeen. good morning. caller: ok my comment brief. anyone with a moderate level of intelligence knows the reason we get into these conflicts is because with the military industrial, where people are making tons and tons of money off of government contracts to start these things to the politicians that they control in washington.
george bush, you know, got us into the mess in afghanistan. these soldiers are really nothing but guinea pigs. that's the reality of it. i don't mean to disparage or say something bad about anybody who makes their living as a soldier, but -- host: which member of your family -- caller: i respect that. the fact of the matter is -- host: which of your family members served in the military? caller: that's my comment, thank you. host: which of your family members served in the military? i think we lost james. nick in jackson heights, new york. on the line for other war veterans. good morning. caller: yeah, vietnam was a tough deal for all of us. we were told we were going there to confront communism and that
the soviet union was using vietnam as a proxy. look at it today and they are holding back china for us and saying we have to give them all the supplies they need so that they can work with us that way. that's the current government. now you look at the taliban. perhaps what they really want, they are a nationalist group with nobody backing them from outside. so, if they decide they need our help and they comply with some of our requirements, this war will not have been a failure. let's see what time does and let's not paint the situation now as totally a catastrophe. host: richard is in alabama on the line for other war veterans. which or did you serve in? caller: i called in on family members. but i am a disabled veteran. i wasn't in a war, though. my comment is simply that we
need to get the politics out of this mess. forget trump, forget biden. just look at what has happened since. before korea we haven't tried to win a war. we have cowards that have been in the white house who refused serve this country. chose themselves over the country. when you don't understand the military, you have got no right to be commanding at. lloyd austin and this millie guy? they are just politicians now trying to keep their jobs and kissing but. that's about all i got to say. host: do you think military service should be a requirement of being able to run for president? caller: it sure is an asset. without a military mind you don't understand how to treat the people or what they think. host: family members of veterans
out of magnolia, texas. candy, good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i have half of my family is military and him to pull out the did is ridiculous. he doesn't know what he's doing. first you take out the people that actually helped the army. you take them out first. and then after that you go in you take all of the supplies that we have their. then you take out the military. to do it this way, he just at thousands of people killed for no reason. this guy does not know what he's doing. he never has for 50 years. that's all i have to say. innocent people are dying because of him. joe biden. horrible president. host: that is candy in magnolia, texas. on twitter, seeing at the
taliban taking pictures and american humvees, pictures next to helicopters, that's depressing and i'm angry at the afghan army. they all ran and gave up billions of dollars in equipment. op-ed from "the washington post ," from the leader of the national resistance of afghanistan, saying that the resistance to the taliban is beginning now and asking for u.s. help. he writes that he's writing from the valley and ready to follow in his fighter -- his father's footsteps, ready to take on the taliban with stores of ammunition and arms that he's been collecting since his father's time because they knew the day might come. but he said it's not enough. if taliban warlords launch assaults, they will face staunch resistance from the flag of the national resistance front as the flag was 20 years ago and we
know that the forces and logistics will not be sufficient and that the united states and the allies have left the battlefield and can be a great arsenal for democracy as franklin roosevelt said before u.s. entry into world war ii and to that end he said he treats friends in the west as interceding with congress and with the biden administration as well, asking for help. he is the son of the man who was killed by al qaeda back on december 9, 2000 one, just before the september 11 attacks in the united states. if you want to read that op-ed, that is in today's "washington journal" --." steve, family member of a veteran. caller: i have five family
members who were all in world war ii in the south civic. my father had an injury with a purple heart. afghanistan was something we never should have gotten into in the first race. maybe even korea. we are fighting ideas, not people. people are tribal. we don't know when the next school shooting is going to be. try to find out where they are. biden did the best he could. i wonder how competent the army was. there's no good time and i don't mind them, the way joe did it. i had no problem with that. thank you. host: on the idea of fighting people versus ideas, but what about people believing in ideas?
korea, world war ii, we were fighting fascism. fighting nazis. what is the difference between fighting ideas and people? caller: i think if you call pearl harbor and idea, that's not the same thing. if we are attacked like that, it's not the same thing. we are tribal right now. we are fighting a civil war right in our own. i'm not sure that answers your question, but i don't know what else i can say. host: topeka, kansas, michael, what war did you serve in, michael? caller: excuse me? host: what war did you serve in? caller: vietnam, sir. host: how are you feeling watching these pictures? caller: very low. what i'm seeing from what's going on right now, my grandfather was a 36 year navy -- navy man.
my father was 27 years in the air worse and i served in vietnam, 20 years in the service myself. i have never felt lower with what's happening to this country and what's happening to our military. it's just another stab in the back i the administration. not just the republicans, but the democrats as well. once a man is back in the country and out of the service, he strictly forgotten. i've been having problems with my military records. i can't even get my senators to take my phone calls or even return my phone calls. once you are out, you are out. as far as joe biden is concerned, the man is not qualified to run a shoe store. obviously he's not capable of
understanding the military mind or how to run a campaign. he's living proof that the democrats have run out of qualified people. host: you say that the administration stabbed in the back here. do you think that the war in afghanistan, fought under four administrations, do you think the other three stabbed the troops in the back? caller: that's what i said, republicans and democrats. you send people over there to fight to win. not to spend 20 years with no outcome. host: what was the last war that we bought and fought to win? caller: the last war that we fought that we fought to win was world war ii. host: michael in south carolina. a couple of minutes left in this
segment of "the washington journal." hearing from veterans and veteran family members about how they feel about what happened this week. jonathan, what war did you serve in? jonathan, are you there? what war did you serve in? caller: vietnam. host: how are you feeling today? caller: it just really brings back a lot of memories of when vietnam fell. host: what kind of memories? caller: well, just the abandonment. like the previous caller said. once you get home, you are just abandoned. we abandoned vietnam. we are abandoning afghanistan. i just wanted to tell everybody the same thing. the big saying in vietnam was that it don't mean nothing.
it don't mean nothing and it won't mean nothing 10 years from now and it won't mean nothing tomorrow. suck it up and move on, i guess. host: lincoln, nebraska, family member of a veteran, good morning. caller: how are you? host: fine, go ahead. caller: my father participated in world war ii and was a survivor of the korean war. he got called up and i was three months old to go to korea. the thing that we forget is history. about 1838, the 15,000 man british army went and captured kabul. afghanis sent to the survivors to go back and tell people never to come here again. the brits couldn't tame them. the russians couldn't tame them. the soviets couldn't tame them.
we won't be able to. they are a tough, tough hard in a very tough land. host: josh and randolph, minnesota. good morning. -- ian randolph, -- in randolph, minnesota. good morning morning. sorry, that's joseph. caller: that's me. u.s. navy, i was over there and was there when they fired on the turner joy. i was first over there on an aircraft carrier. i take it like this. we go over there, we raise our hand to defend the country. if the country says go, we go. when i came back they didn't say thank you, they said baby killer. half the people were drunks and on drugs.
i'm just saying, why don't we have a leader in the white house that can take care of this? this is wrong. these people helped us out and now when they decide to be an ally, how many countries are on our side getting in this situation? none. why should they? i wouldn't go. this is terrible. this is the stupidest thing i've ever seen and it comes from the stupidest president ever to be in the white house. host: do you think that we treat veterans better when they come back now? caller: today, they do. factoring vietnam, not now, now they say thank you for your service. a buddy of mine doesn't like that but it doesn't bother me one way or the other. i'm just saying, all we want to do is serve our country. when i went in there it was $89
a month in 1962. i didn't start getting money until about 10 years in. south carolina, we were making less money than prisoners before they started giving us more money. but the money wasn't important. i enjoyed the navy and my ship eats. i will tell you, we stick together, we do what we are told to do. i was first class in vietnam. i'm just saying. we loved each other. we get the right thing and we came back and found out we shouldn't have probably even been over there. but at least we got back. this is a foolishness. host: i've got less than a minute here, but since your buddy doesn't like it when people say thank you for your service, why doesn't he like that? caller: because they said
baby killer when he came back. they're trying to make up for it. -- he does not like it. he thinks it is a joke. he was in the air force for 30 years. i was in the navy for 20. he thinks people are making a joke by saying "thank you for your service." you cannot force upon people today what happened 20 or 30 years ago. that is up to them to make a decision. i was not a baby killer. i was just doing my job. that is what i was paid to do. i wish the one in the white house would be impeached. he is a worthless president. he is the most worthless i have seen.
thank you. host: last caller in this segment of the "washington journal." stick around, plenty more to talk about. in our next 45 minutes, we will turn to the covid pandemic. we will talk to dr. richard besser on guidance for covid-19 booster shots out from the biden white house yesterday. later, we will be joined by madiha afzal of the brookings institution to talk about the taliban takeover of afghanistan and what it means in the region. stick around, we will be right back. ♪ >> walking from washington, d.c. to new york city, a former "washington journal" reporter reflects on his nearly 300 mile journey. >> with all that has happened, all of us being shut in, walking
around behind masks, the long covid winter that we color, the events played out -- covid winter that we called it, the events that played out, there was a lot of blood in the air. just walk through a spring, see it unfold and look up close and very slowly and meet people along the way and try to understand where we are as a country at the moment. >> neil king on his nearly 300 mile journey, walking from washington, d.c. to new york city, on sunday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on q&a. you can find q&a interviews were ever you get your podcasts. ♪
>> "washington journal" continues. host: we welcome back to the "washington journal" dr. richard besser, former acting director of the cdc, joining us this morning in the wake of several major covid announcements. first, your reaction to the booster shot announcement and your assessment of the data behind that announcement on the effectiveness of the mrna vaccines and whether they are waning over time? guest: it is great to be here.
there is a lot of covid news. what we heard yesterday is the administration is planning to roll out boosters for everyone in america who received one of the mrna vaccines -- the moderna and the pfizer vaccine. they are making those plans due to data from the u.s. and overseas. the studies that were released here in the mmwr, a publication the cdc puts out, shows a couple things. on the good news front, the study shows the vaccines remain extremely effective at preventing hospitalization, which is really what we designed the vaccine to do, to prevent severe infection, hospitalization and death. that has held up really well. what some of the study showed, however, is the protection against overall infection goes down. it is not clear from these
studies whether it goes down because of a dropping level of protecting factors over time, or because of the new variant that is now -- it accounts for more than 90%, the delta variant. much more contagious. what is clear from these studies another trends around the world is the vaccines are not as good as preventing overall infection. data from israel do suggest that over time, vaccines become less effective in preventing severe infection. it has not been seen here, but the administration is planning because of concerns we likely would see an increased risk of severe infection. there are a couple things that have to take place before this would roll out. these are really important. they are something i look to whenever there is a change.
the fda has to review the company data from madera and pfizer to review if the vaccines are safe and effective for a third dose. and then the advisory committee for amino station practices -- who did they recommend get these vaccines and when? that is an important piece. they could agree with the assessment that everyone in america should get a third dose, or they could look at it and say, only high-risk individuals, people in certain settings. i will look at their conversation to help guide how i think about this rollout. host: not everyone believes boosters are the right move in the united states. i want your reaction to the world health organization's reaction to the news. boosters will create a divide
between the haves and the have nots. the who's emergency chief even more poignant, saying the booster plan is like giving out extra lifejackets to people who already have lifejackets while leaving others to drown without a life jacket. guest: i know dr. ryan and i think this is a valid critique. globally, more than 80% of vaccines have gone to wealthy nations. this is morally unacceptable. it is also unacceptable from a self interest perspective in the u.s., because as the virus continues to circulate widely across the globe, there are more opportunities for new variants to arise. whenever a virus multiplies, replicates, there are mistakes made.
when those mistakes lead to a strain that can now invade yemen system, it can spread -- the immune system, it can spread. there is always a chance there could be a new variant the vaccines are not effective against. i think our government has a responsibility to look at protection of american citizens, people who live in america, but the united states also has a moral responsibility as a world leader, one of the wealthiest nations in the world, should do a lot more to get vaccines to other countries. that will need to include ramping up production, pushing hard for technology transfer so the proprietary information that these companies have can be shared with other manufacturing facilities around the globe to
increase production. it is absolutely wrong that the distribution of vaccines globally is so skewed toward wealthy nations. host: the numbers if viewers want to join the conversation with dr. richard besser, (202) 748-8000 if you are vaccinated. if you are not vaccinated, (202) 748-8001. the former acting director of the cdc. guest: the robert wood johnson foundation, we are the addition's largest philanthropy focused on improving health care in the united states. our foundation was founded with dollars that came from the johnson family, which built johnson & johnson, and we own stock in the company johnson & johnson. host: the booster shots we have been talking about for the pfizer and moderna vaccine's, what happens with johnson &
johnson vaccinated individuals? guest: the administration is saying we need to wait on that. we need to see data on two doses of the j&j vaccine. once they have that data, the fda will look at that data and likely recommend a booster shot for people who received the j&j vaccine. the timeframe of eight months after the final dose, or for the j&j vaccine it would be one dose, that would mean there would not need to be any conversation or decision around the j&j vaccine until november. that vaccine was not introduced until march. host: in other news, another announcement yesterday on the mandate front, president biden announcing vaccine mandates for those who work in nursing home facilities. here is the president from yesterday. [video clip] pres. biden: if you work in a nursing home and serve people on
medicare or medicaid, you will also be required to get vaccinated. more than 130,000 residents in nursing homes have sadly over the period of this virus passed away. at the same time, vaccination rates among nursing home staff trail the rest of the country. the study show highly vaccinated nursing home staff is associated with at least 30% less covid-19 cases among long-term care residents. this announcement, i am using the power of the federal government as a payer of health care cost to reduce those risks to our most vulnerable seniors. these steps are all about keeping people safe and out of harm's way. host: the president yesterday afternoon. dr. besser, a good idea?
guest: i think it is a great idea. one thing that has concerned me is the low rate of vaccination among those who work in long-term care facilities. i am a supporter of mandates. we think about vaccination as a personal decision. but there is a famous phrase that one's freedom or liberty ends at the end of one's nose. if the decision to not get vaccinated puts others at risk, i think there is a reason for mandates to rectify that. nursing home residents are at risk if those caring for them are not vaccinated. those in hospitals are at risk if those caring for them are unvaccinated. workers are at risk if those
around them are not vaccinated. we are reopening our doors at the robert wood johnson foundation after labor day, but only workers who are fully vaccinated will be allowed to work in the building. i think that is appropriate. it is a responsibility we have. even workers who are fully vaccinated, there is no guarantee that each of them will have a high level of protection that will prevent covid infection. these are some of the best vaccines we have, but even with that, if you are talking about a 95% vaccine effectiveness, that means 5% of people who are vaccinated could still get covid. i think this is a very smart move. there is data that has shown the number of cases in nursing homes are on the rise. whether that is due to the length of time since nursing home residents were vaccinated or the delta variant is not quite clear. it is likely nursing home
residents if a booster program moves forward would be the first to get them, that would be a good thing. requiring everyone who works around them will save lives. host: dr. richard besser has joined us on the "washington journal" a half-dozen times since the start of the pandemic. always happy to take your calls and answer your questions. we have split the lines by vaccinated and unvaccinated. jeff is up first out of new york on the line for those who are vaccinated. go ahead. caller: thank you for all the great work you do to try to get the message out. i have a question about, basically, how we can get better equity, globally, in the vaccination process? i see that you advocate for that and i strongly agree. we don't really have the studies that would provide evidence through modeling, of course
because it is a future event, how the outcomes would be if we were to distribute the vaccines more equally among the nations of the world. we do not have data that shows -- we could have the least possible amount of mortality in terms of distribution of the vaccines. instead, what we have is, understandably, people wanted to vaccinate their own nation if they can afford to do so. in contention without world health organization's plea to distribute the vaccine more equally. what we need is a study so people can see the choice they make produces additional mortality, if they were to veer from that, at least the models would predict that. modeling predictions is what we use in our own country when make these kinds of decisions about vaccination. host: let's take that one
because it is a complicated one. dr. besser. guest: i would encourage you to look at the who website and covax, an organization focused on global -- if you think about the decision analysis we make in the united states, that we want to protect first those at the highest risk of dying from covid. when vaccines were rolled out, they went to people who were elderly, people in nursing homes, with underlying medical conditions and put them at risk. we also had in that group frontline health care workers. we don't need fancy modeling studies to tell us the fact that there are thousands and thousands of frontline health care workers, doctors, nurses, in countries all over the globe
that have no access whatsoever to a vaccine, that that is wrong. we do not need to wait on the for that and we need to global community to do more. if you think about it, these vaccines, a lot of them were developed with federal dollars. the research that went into the technology for mrna vaccines was developed with federal dollars. a lot of this work came out of the national institutes of health, which is our tax dollars. given that, we should have a say in how these vaccines are made available to other countries. the idea that some of these vaccines are manufactured in lower income countries, but then are shipped from those countries to wealthy nations is absolutely wrong. host: to our friend to the north in montreal, canada, this is
richard calling in on the line of those unvaccinated. good morning. caller: good morning. i am hearing from a lot of nurses in the united states that covid patients in hospitals are being denied the right to try. patients are hearing from great doctors that hydroxychloroquine help. these patients wonder why they are being denied the right to try. if patients do not want to go on ventilators, if they want hydroxychloroquine to try, they should be allowed to try. i want to know what the doctors are against that. thank you. guest: richard, i think it is important as new treatments are identified, or potential treatments are identified, they are quickly assessed in clinical
trials in controlled settings to know whether or not they work. that was the case for hydroxychloroquine and it was shown to not be effective, especially early on in the health crisis, where it is not known what will work. it is very important there is an openness to learn. it is important the learning -- when something is found not to be effective, the government, the clinical organizations, the health care system does not allow a foster to perpetuate so people think there is a magic bullet out there. the most important thing we can do to get this pandemic under control is to listen to those people who have not been vaccinated so far, try to address their concerns so they can make a decision. if we were able to vaccinate the entire globe, this would go away.
there is a significant number of people still have concerns who have not assigned to get vaccinated, and there are still communities where there are challenges to get vaccines. largely black and brown communities, people with disabilities who are homebound and challenged to get vaccines. it is important that if a booster program moves forward, it does not get in the way of continuing to work hard to encourage people who have not been vaccinated at all to get vaccinated. one of the things that gives me some hope is that in some of the states that haven't hit the hardest recently during the pandemic, we are seeing an increase uptake for vaccines for first-timers. people are saying i have friends and family members who are getting very sick from this virus, i want to do everything i can to get this under control to protect me, my family and my community. host: for those people who might
still be on the fence, i wonder what you think this booster announcement will do to that. the data here showing waning protection rates over time, are you concerned that will keep people from getting their first shot, when we are now talking about a three shot dose? guest: i hope not. i encourage people to talk to health providers, their own doctors and nurses, people they trust, about this. i am a general pediatrician. the idea over time that people need additional doses of vaccine is not something new to me. we vaccinate every baby, every young child at age 1 against measles, mumps. we have learned over time the level of protection drops down, not everyone gets a full level
of protection. before kids enter school at the age of four or five, they get another dose. they do not need another dose after that. for something like flu, we found each season, we need another dose of the flu vaccine. some of it is also due to the drop in immunity you get from your annual flu shot. host: pennsylvania, claire on the line for those who are vaccinated. caller: good morning. i am a teacher in pennsylvania. last spring, the pennsylvania department of education made available but johnson & johnson vaccine to all of the teachers in the state. there were hundreds, perhaps thousands of us who got the johnson & johnson vaccine. our school year starts in about two weeks. is there any way we can get some information about the booster
shot for the johnson & johnson before our school year starts? that is kind of a general question for all the teachers, but for me, personally, i am immuno suppressed. i had covid lester and i have not been able to -- i had covid last year and i have not been able to return to work. i wonder if you recommend another johnson & johnson booster shot or should i try to get one of the mrna shots instead? thank used to much and good luck with the work you are doing. host: dr. besser? guest: i am sorry to hear about your own health issues and you had covid last year. i encourage you to talk to your doctor about your own situation
and if it is worth you getting a vaccine now at this time. in terms of the overall picture for those received the j&j vaccine, the one dose, the government is waiting on data. the company has done a two-dose trial. i have not seen any data to suggest the level of protection from the one dose vaccine people received has fallen off. i would say, stay tuned. if it is in line with what the government is recommending for those who receive the mrna vaccine, the earliest group getting a vaccine eight months out would be in november. in terms of what we need to do to protect teachers and staff and children in schools, i think we need to require that all people who can get vaccinated in those schools get vaccinated. that will protect teachers and
staff in a big way. we need to ensure that schools have done the measures that the cdc have lifted up to provide a safe environment. looking at the ventilation system, requiring testing protocols, separating desks at least three feet and requiring that everyone wear a mask indoors. those things are all part of what it takes to create a safe environment. thankfully, children are at a very low risk of severe disease, hospitalization and dying from this. but that is not true for everyone who works in a school. we have to make sure the environment is safe for teachers and staff. i believe children belong in school learning this fall, it is important for their educational progression, but it is also important for their physical and mental health, their socialization, and i believe we can do it safely.
rates of transmission and schools tended to be lower than in the surrounding community. it will be a rocky fall because we will see schools that have to close down periodically as cases of covid due to the delta variant come into the school. i think we can do this safely for everyone. host: vicki is in chicago, vaccinated, good morning. vicki, are you with us? caller: yes, yes i am. i have a question. my husband and myself, we are both senior citizens in a high-risk group. we received our covid shots. i received moderna, my husband received pfizer. none of us developed anti-bodies. my question is, how is this possible?
we had different vaccines, what is going on? what happened? what should we do now? guest: thank you for that question. it is an interesting question. i am not sure exactly why you had anti-body levels measured following vaccination, since that is something that is not routinely done. the vaccines have been shown to be extremely effective for the two-dose series. i would suggest you talk to your doctor about that. there is always a possibility if you are on a particular medication that could have interfered with the vaccine effectiveness. unfortunately, i cannot give personal medical advice on television. that would not be good for you. i would encourage you to talk to your doctor about that.
host: new york city on the line for the unvaccinated. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. the reason i am unvaccinated is i have been advised by multiple medical providers that i cannot be. i am in a rare category. i am now in new york city and experiencing quite a bit of discrimination as someone who is disabled, mostly homebound. i feel like we put all of our eggs in one basket -- vaccination. we were promised rapid, affective covid testing so if you need to enter a restaurant to go to the bathroom, if i am well enough able to eat, i am prohibited from using a toilet, for example. i do not understand what happened with the promise for
rapid, affective testing. i am concerned about masking. americans have consistently been told -- other than the beginning were told not to wear masks -- i feel like nobody has leveled with the american people. the reason we were told not to wear masks is production of masks were in china at 90%, 10% to mexico. one of the last manufacturers of n-95, he gave powerful testimony before a house subcommittee. he went to multiple administrations, telling them the off shorings of masks was a risk and he was unsuccessful in convincing our government that we needed n95s manufactured in this country. people have been told to wear masks. a cloth mask provides 20%
protection. a medical mask is worn properly, maybe 40%. an n95 gives you 95% protection. guest: thank you for those questions. the first point i want to get to is there are a group of people in our country who cannot get vaccinated. there are people in our country who get vaccinated and due to various immune disorders, will docket protection. it is critically important we all do our part by getting vaccinated ourselves, following public health guides in terms of wearing masks where that is indicated, and we address the needs of people with disabilities. the issue you raise about safe, rapid tests for covid is an
important one. there are more tests available, they are antigen test's that can give you a result at home. these are not part of what has been implemented at restaurants and stores to allow entry of individuals. the movement has been toward masks. when it comes to masks, there is better guidance out now than early on. if you go to the cdc website, there are a lot of specifics around the types of masks to wear, considerations for double masking. the data comparing different kinds of masks and levels of protection. i am getting a sense, nationally, that there is a lot of fatigue. people want this to just be over and they are tired of doing the measures that public health has asked to stem the pandemic.
if you look at australia, new zealand, they have been able to control the pandemic in a dramatic fashion through use of lockdowns and social distancing. that was done very early in the pandemic here, but it is clearly not effective given the widespread transmission. at this point, the public is very tired of the recommendations coming forward, even though they are very important. it is also important to recognize that there are settings that for many people, not wearing a mask is a safe thing to do. if you are fully vaccine a, being outside in the open without a mask is a relatively safe thing to do. when you see someone who is wearing a mask, do not assume they are wearing a mask because they decided to not get vaccinated. there are people who have disabilities where they cannot get vaccinated, or they got vaccinated and they were not protected. it is very important we do all
we can to reduce the stigma, here. host: the cdc, whether it is on guidance or whether it is nimble enough and a fast-changing world, especially with the delta variant, an article from the washington post on this topic, the handling of delta data by the cdc set the u.s.-backed, noting frustration with the slow approach to sharing data that prevented officials across the government from getting real-time information about how the delta variant was bearing down on the u.s. and behaving with greater ferocity. i wonder about your thoughts as the former acting director of the cdc on those criticisms. guest: i am quoted in that article. i think it is a valid critique. the cdc as an institution, traditionally through its history, has been very academic.
has wanted to ensure all of the data brought forward has been checked, double checked, triple jack, peer-reviewed -- triple checked, peer-reviewed before being published. in the article, it talks about a movement going forward. the cdc is establishing a rapid data analysis and projection center that will be led by a couple of very well-known epidemiologists. i hope the promise of the center of the cdc israelites, to be able to provide much more rapid data, data in near real-time for decision-making. somebody times over the course of this pandemic, as guidance has changed, it appears a drop from the sky because the data, the thinking, the clarity in terms of what studies were
ongoing that informed those decisions was not always there. i am hopeful this recognition that the agency can do better and must do better pays off. host: about 10 minutes left with dr. richard besser. charles is on the line for those who are vaccinated. thank you for waiting. caller: thank you for taking my call. this morning, i am ready to go on vacation with my family. there will be five different family members. we live in one big home. three of our families are vaccinated. two are not. the environment is changing. i am wondering if it is safe for us to all be housed like that. thank you. guest: thank you for raising that question. when you think about risk in
various settings, you have to look at each person's individual risk and each person's tolerance of rest. as people get older, the risk of getting severe covid, and a bad outcome from covid goes up given the new data that there is an increased risk of breakthrough infections, the concerns there could be a risk for severe infections, i would be very -- i personally would be very reluctant to share indoor space, unmasked with people who are not vaccinated. i think that is a very challenging and risky situation to be in. the current recommendations would be that everyone would remain masked in that setting. over a prolonged period of time in close contact with people who are not vaccinated, if anyone is at increased risk of severe
infection, it is a risk i would not tolerate, but each person has to make that decision for themselves. host: when will the fda give final approval for the vaccines in use? that is an excuse, he said, for a reason to not get vaccinated. guest: the fda has been pretty tightlipped on this. dr. fauci said at the end of august, early september might be the time the fda gives full approval to one of these vaccines. i think that would be a good thing. it would encourage more businesses, entities to look at vaccine mandates and that would be a positive thing. before we run out of time, i do want to say the biggest effort we need to make is around reaching people who are not yet vaccinated. understanding people's concerns, recognizing the concerns come from people's own lived experiences.
there are people who do not trust government. there are communities -- black communities -- people who have been mistreated over generations. it takes a lot to earn the trust in settings like that. it is important we do not give up on any community, that we continue to do increased outreach and communities, people are hearing from voices that they trust and we make vaccines as available as possible. it is so critically important. host: will try to get you one or two more calls from the unvaccinated line. jacksonville, florida, this is ted. caller: how are you doing this morning? a previous caller answered my first question. the next question, how can it be required for a person to take a vaccine to maintain their job that has been in an experimental state? guest: thank you for that
question. these vaccines are not experimental. these vaccines have been authorized under emergency use authorization. i do not consider these to be experimental. i do look forward to the fda's granting of their full licensing, which is different from being experimental. i don't think there have been any vaccines where we have more information or data, using hundreds of millions of people in terms of effectiveness and safety. as a pediatrician and a parent, i am convinced these vaccines are incredibly safe and effective. but hopefully come forward with their approval, soon. host: mike, unvaccinated, paterson, new jersey.
good morning. caller: people that are coming in, some of them are bringing covid. they will be coming to our military base. how'd you know they will not -- do we want to do what we are supposed to do for america first? you should not have the border open for seven months and bringing it in. i think criminal charges should be held against joe. just like cuomo. this guy is opening the border and people are all over the country. host: on the border of united states and immigrants. guest: it is important anyone coming into our country is tested, is provided with
quarantine and vaccination, so that they are safe and they are not bringing in any disease that could be harmful to anyone else. that is an easy thing to do. that is something currently going on. i think it is a distraction to think about the risk from covid being one coming from the outside. the biggest risk for covid in our country is the fact so many people have decided not to get vaccinated. until that changes, we will continue to see widely circulating curve it. we will continue to see people who have been vaccinated, a small percentage of them get sick as well, because of the ongoing rapid transmission. i encourage all of the viewers, the listeners to talk to their health care providers to get honest, factual information to
make their own decision about getting vaccinated. it is important for those who have been vaccinated to create space to allow those who have so far decided not to get vaccinated to change their mind. do not badger, do not stigmatize, give people room to look at the evidence and make a different decision. host: we have a couple more minutes and several callers left. tara is in brooklyn on the line for those who are vaccinated. good morning. caller: good morning. i understand there are a lot of reasons people do not want to get vaccinated, but i think there is a big frustration when there are people of privilege who are saying, i do not want to no what is in this but they are drinking big gulps of coca-cola. guest: i think many people have different reasons for not wanting to get vaccinated.
i encourage each person who has not gotten vaccinated to challenge their assumptions, talk to trusted health care providers and other people they trust. there are summary stories of people who have gotten severe covid, people in the hospital who wished they had made a different decision. so many families that have lost loved ones who wished the loved ones made a different decision. there are summary children who have lost their parents and wish their parents made a different decision. host: from our text messaging system. have there been studies that compare data that look at the effectiveness of the immunity from the vaccines with the natural immunity of having had the virus? guest: for some infectious diseases, if you get the natural infection, your level a
protection is more effective and longer lasting. we will not know all of the information on this for years. there are some studies that show individuals who have vetted natural infection are at greater risk of reinfection than people who have been fully vaccinated. this is one of the situations were even if you had covid, the recommendation is you should get vaccinated because it will give you a higher bump in your anti-bodies and the feeling is it will give you longer-lasting protection. that is a really good question. not all of the data is in on that. at this point, it is clear it is safe to get vaccinated if you have had a covid infection. host: gainesville, georgia, the line for those who have been vaccinated. caller: thank you for allowing me to speak. in one of your comments a while ago, one of the big arguments and -- it has not been approved
so i will not be vaccinated. however, i did pull up an article i thought was interesting this last week that said there was an application, the only application that has been set up and sent to the fda, it was pfizer. they were looking to expedite the approval sometime between now and february 2022. what i also thought was interesting was they said by dharna and -- they said moderna and johnson has not filed the application yet. that might be a roadblock people are looking at saying, it has not been approved. i would love to hear the comments from the doctor. guest: these up all been authorized under emergency use. there are a number of people who have said once against the full approval from the fda, they will
roll up their sleeves and get vaccinated. that process from the fda often takes longer than a year. there is a lot of pressure on fda to try to get that done faster. you want to make sure they are not cutting any corners on that. my hope is it will be soon that they grant the full approval to the pfizer vaccine and it allows people to change their mind. it is correct that there are different types of approvals. there is one during an emergency and there is one for overall licensing, and that is what we are looking for. host: elizabeth in washington, north carolina, the line four unvaccinated. go ahead. caller: hi. i am calling regarding the covid and the vaccination. my son is 37 years old.
he lives hours away. he caught covid twice last year. when the vaccine came out, he got vaccinated. a month after his last shot, he caught covid three times, he is down with it now. why? i don't understand. for this vaccine to lose its strength so soon, it seems to me it is a pretty weak-made vaccine in the first place. i am very curious about this and i know he cannot be the only one out there who had this happen. host: we are running out of time and i want to give dr. besser a chance to respond so let me let him jump in.
guest: thank you for the question. i cannot comment specifically on your son's health, but i can say there are some individuals who have immune conditions where they will not amount an effective response to a vaccine. one reason it is so important that everyone gets vaccinated to provide protection to people who cannot get vaccinated for various medical reasons, people who get vaccinated but do not get an immune response, and those with religious reasons who cannot get vaccinated. we talk about herd immunity and getting high levels of vaccination in the community, it is to protect those who do not have protection from a vaccine. host: dr. richard besser, president and ceo of the robert wood johnson foundation, we
always appreciate your time. guest: my pleasure. thank you, and thank you to the viewers for those excellent questions. host: for the next 45 minutes, we will return to the topic of afghanistan. we will be joined by madiha afzal of the brookings institution to talk about what a taliban takeover could mean for the region. stick around for that discussion. we will be right back. ♪ >> representative seth moulton of massachusetts talks about u.s. efforts to relocate afghans due to the taliban takeover of their country. live coverage begins today at 2:30 p.m. eastern, online at
c-span.org or listen on the free c-span radio app. ♪ >> your opinion matters. c-span's student video competition. be part of the national conversation by creating a documentary about how the federal government impacts your life. discuss federal policy that affects you or your community. the competition has $100,000 in total cash prizes and you have a chance at the grand prize of $5,000. entries will begin being received on wednesday, september 8. for more information, visit our website at studentcam.org. ♪ >> weekends on c-span2 are an
intellectual feast. every saturday, you will find events and explore our nation's past on american history tv. book tv is television for serious readers. learn, discover, explore. weekends on c-span2. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: a discussion now on the future of afghanistan and the region with madiha afzal, a foreign fellow with the brookings institution, and an author. madiha afzal, i want to start with what viewers should know about the taliban and its leadership today, and what you will be looking for as we try to determine what the future of afghanistan will look like in the coming days and weeks. guest: good morning.
thank you for having me. the taliban, after their takeover of kabul, they have come onto the world stage. they held a press conference a day after and this was streamed live on the bbc, watched by the world. they said things the world wanted to hear. i think we should be very, very wary of the taliban's history and its actions on the ground. do not take what they say at face value. that would be my first recommendation. they said they will grant amnesty. on the ground, there are already reports of reprisals. they said they would protect women's rights under islamic law. that is vague and purposely vague. at the very least, it means they
are very, very harsh, very draconian interpretation of islamic law. on the ground in the areas they have taken over, the countryside, provincial capitals over the last week, it is very different from what they are doing in kabul. those are the things we should be looking for. we should pay much more attention on their actions rather than what they say. host: who is the leaders of the taliban today? how different of an organization is it from 20 years ago, the taliban that ruled afghanistan? guest: the major difference is the taliban's political leadership has become much more able to talk to the world. it was granted international legitimacy by signing a deal with united states last year in
february. even in the run up to that, it has started to be granted legitimacy because it was negotiating with the u.s. it has moved around the world, going to various capitals, meeting with foreign ministers, it met with the chinese foreign minister, one of the leaders of the taliban met with the chinese foreign minister. it has garnered this international diplomatic legitimacy, even as it was fighting with -- at that point -- a government. the major difference i see is their diplomatic and outward posture, in terms of rhetoric. on the ground, this could be partly because there is a disconnect between the political leadership and the fighters on the ground, on the ground, there
fighters look very much the same. the implementation of what they are doing looks very much the same as it did in the 1996-2001 timeframe. in that timeframe, they were essentially isolated from the world. there were just a few governments that recognized them. in 2021, what do have made clear is they want international legitimacy, they want to have a relationship with other countries. what they are basically assuring the other countries of, including the u.s. and china, is the afghan soil will not be used to attack other countries. that counterterrorism assurance is what they are offering in return for those governments recognizing them. whether that holds or not is a question.
they are being extremely vague on what they mean when it comes to human rights, women's rights, etc., within afghanistan, and we should watch that. host: madiha afzal is our guest, from the brookings institution. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. veterans of the war in afghanistan, (202) 748-8003. as folks are calling in and we try to understand what a taliban-road afghanistan means for the region, what are you going to be watching in pakistan? guest: in pakistan, the first thing to watch is whether pakistan recognizes the taliban government once it is formed. the government has not been formed yet and afghanistan. once it is formed, does pakistan
recognize it? what kind of relationship does pakistan establish with that? in 1996-2001, pakistan was one of only three countries to recognize a taliban government. this time, it will be more cautious. it will not take a unilateral decision on this, it will wait for consultations with other regional countries. my sense is it will wait for china, its ally, to see what moves it makes. it will not be the first to recognize a taliban government. but, i think it will eventually establish a relationship with it. that relationship could be something that the u.s. uses to get pakistan to pressure the taliban on things like human rights, women's rights. host: you talk about the history of the taliban.
what about the history of pakistan's relationship with the taliban? what should we know? guest: pakistan in the 1996-2001 timeframe was one of the principal backers, especially pakistan's intelligence agency. in 2001, when pakistan joined with the u.s. and supporting the u.s. war in afghanistan, taliban leaders slipped into pakistan and were able to gain sanctuary there. even now, their families live in pakistan. this is something the interior minister of pakistan has acknowledged. they slip back and forth to get medical treatment. pakistan, again, about the last
two years in the trump administration, signed on to help with the afghan peace office and put pressure on the taliban to come to the negotiating table with the u.s. pakistan released one of the leaders of the taliban, who was in custody in pakistan. it has had a relationship, certainly, with the taliban, but that relationship, i would argue, at this stage, is not seamless. it is a complicated one. the taliban does not trust the pakistan intelligence agency. the taliban has become powerful. it has relationships with other countries, including iran. it also has, because of this international legitimacy it has
gained with its travel toguest:. this kind of military independence that he gained makes it less reliance upon back standing -- upon pakistani support. host: this on twitter from jordan, an independent film maker showing an independence day protest in kabul. he said they marched past taliban soldiers with some of them screaming back at the protesters. some of the video filmed by that filmmaker.
what does that seen -- scene tell you? guest: that is a striking development and it shows you, tells you that afghanistan of 2021 is not the same as the afghanistan of 1990 six or even 2001. there are these -- afghanistan of 1996 or even 2001. that have come of age and have freedoms at the time they did not have the five years that the taliban ruled from 1996 to 2001. they will not accept a taliban government without protest. there is a notion that the
afghan flag have been replaced by the taliban flag. even in that press conference that was held earlier this week was held at a government media facility and the only difference there, everything else was the same as it was a few weeks ago when the government spoke to the media. the only difference there was the fact that the flag, the afghan flag have been changed with the taliban. people sitting there were taliban spokespeople. there was a protest yesterday. i think these are significant themes. it shows again how it has changed. host: out of watertown, tennessee, independent. good morning. caller: thanks for taking my
call. of got three things. i like to make sure that this lady gets back to my first question. the number one question, just remember who's funding perkins institute. qatar. my main point is this. the people that are most in charge of this debacle and a dent -- and afghanistan are supposedly the best and brightest people in the country. anthony blinken never held a job outside of government. jake sullivan, yale. this lady got three degrees from yale. joe biden never held a job outside the government. what we've got is an absolute debacle and everyone that is responsible for it, think tanks and these government officials
were all ivy league. host: got your point. do you want to talk about what you do at the brookings institute first? guest: what was the question? host: your role at the brookings institution and what you do there. >> i am a scholar of the region so my book which came out a few years ago looks at the roots of extremism in pakistan and how the state has fostered extremism in pakistan. my role is as a scholar, as a writer of the reacher -- of the region and observer of the region. host: his concerns about the
people making decisions on afghanistan. your thoughts. guest: we will be talking about this for months, for the next few days, for months and years to come. there is plenty of blame to go around. there is this extent to one could talk to the -- talk about the u.s. war. one could talk about the deal that the trump administration negotiated with the taliban which gave the taliban everything they wanted for very little in return. they did not live up to. then one can talk about president biden's decision to withdraw unconditionally from with -- from afghanistan. in a way that did not allow for
the or did not push the taliban to come to the table and talk peace with the afghan government. my recommendation throughout, and you can go back and read all of what i have written on this, my recommendation for the u.s. administration over the last two years has been to stay with a small number of troops until a peace deal was reached. stay to ensure the taliban cuts ties with al qaeda. the withdrawal if that kid of -- if that kind of peace deal had been reached, we might have ended up being in a better position rather than a complete takeover of the country and kabul by the taliban. there is plenty of blame to go
around, not just the u.s. there is plenty of blame to go around and afghanistan as well. the corrupt government and leadership failed to inspire, to lead the afghan security forces who were dying in the tens of thousands. the region had important roles it played as well that led to this outcome. there is quite enough blame to go around. host: jerry out of huntington beach, california. democrat. good morning. caller: your point about the afghan government not leading the country, it's only been about money over there. get away with whatever they can get away with.
as far as the taliban is concerned, i don't know why anybody in their right mind even negotiates with them. what's the best outcome? it's a disaster. hypothetically, let's say you had a group of people they wanted to take over afghanistan. 50% of them were referenced and 50% were child molesters, but i don't see the difference between the taliban and a group like that. they should have ousted the taliban years ago. host: got your point. guest: thanks for your question. this was not negotiating with the taliban. it was not something that anyone in the u.s. administration would have the desire to do 15 years ago, 20 years ago. the reality of the matter is this more could not be won on
the battlefield. that's what led the u.s. to negotiate. what would a better negotiation have looked like? the taliban should have engaged in a cease-fire. they should have, that should have been the prerequisite. they should've negotiated in good faith with the afghan government. both things did not happen. they kept on adopting strategies. we are here currently at an outcome that nobody desired and that was certainly not the outcome that anyone wanted with negotiations with the taliban. about a year and a half ago on the cusp of the deal being signed before we saw what the deal was, i wrote a piece saying
what are the costs of negotiating with the very terrorists you want -- you want sought to defeat? what is the cost of that? we should reckon with the cost of negotiating with a group like the taliban. i think the key is there really was no choice but to do this. host: to stephen out of windham, connecticut. independent, good morning. you are next. caller: i agree with everything you said. i think you are spot on. personally, i don't think the war after we got bin laden was worth fighting. i want to bring it up to this morning -- to this moment and time -- moment in time. the most difficult press
conference of ever seen out of the pentagon in my life. it was just so, it broke my heart. it was really difficult to watch. host: which part in particular? caller: they were trying to explain why we can't stay there to rescue everybody. there was no good way to say it's going to take years to get everybody out. it may take years or all of the americans to get out. i think personally we should have healthy august 31 deadline. the administration has to have some possibility. what i want to ask her is do you have friends or family because i'm seeing all these hot -- heartfelt stories. we want to get the good guys out. want to get the girls out. we want to get the women out. we want to get the interaction rules out. you have anybody you want to get out of there? guest: thank you for your
question. i think the scenes from monday with so many afghans running on the runway of kabul airport with airplanes taking off around them and the image of the afghans crowded in the u.s. air force plane, 640 of them. those images really resonate. there are some any of them who want to get out and who cannot. there are also afghans who want to stay. it just this morning, i was on a radio program that is out of canada. afghan had also joined the conversation and he said he is
not going to leave. he said regardless of whether this is going to be for him a time where his freedoms will be curtailed, he wants to stay. there are afghans who will choose to stay, but for many who work for the united states and who worked with afghan government they are very worried about their future and they are trying to get out. i know so many stories of people who want to leave and will not be able to. there has been a remarkable job by various media outlets reporting exactly what's going on around the airport that people cannot actually get to the airport even if they have papers to leave. that is one part of the story. the other part of the story is all of the people who are in their homes and around the country who wish they could leave but can't. there's a third part of the
story where people have no choice but to stay. host: what was that professor's name at the american university? is he on twitter? guest: i think he was on the bbc just last night. i can certainly share the twitter handle with you if you would like. host: sure. as you find that. about 15 minutes left with madiha afzal to ask the questions you want to ask. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independence, 202-748-8002. war veterans, 202-748-8003. madiha afzal works at brookings
institute. were you able to find the twitter hanno -- twitter handle? guest: anyone who wants to look him up can. host: rochester, minnesota. democrat. good morning. caller: i was just wondering, the moneys that comes from our tax money and the people of this country. it does afghanistan, do they turn around and use that money to purchase their weapons from our country so the money takes you turn from our tax money back into the hands of the weapons? or does a bunch of that money go to relief of the afghan people to better their lives? i will get off and let you answer. thank you. guest: thank you for your question.
the u.s. has supported the afghan security forces in every way. arms, money. it has supported the government. it supported development projects in afghanistan. all across the board, the military, the government and on the ground. there has been a great deal of support. sadly, we saw the afghan communities -- forces collapsed this week. there are reasons for that that are endemic to afghanistan. one of the important things to remember is that they were so dependent that they relied on
the u.s. intelligence support. once that was taken away from them. they really did not have the capability in many ways combined with the fact to cover the corruption at the top. they were actually severely underpaid. they didn't even have meals at one point. when they saw taliban winning and were faced with it, they thought rather than die for a losing cause they basically surrendered. they may have been so underpaid, reports of them repeat this receiving stipends from the taliban as they walked away. it is quite a sad story. we know that there have been made over the last 20 years. -- there have been gains been
made over the last 20 years. gains for women and girls who have worked, gone to school. there have been improvements and that is important to remember. that is largely due to us. there is obviously corruption and there has been a siphoning off of money. one must remember the improvements. host: jonesboro, arkansas. keith, a republican. good morning. caller: my comment is quite brief. i'm a marine. i have friends who went and served their in iraq and afghanistan. they were perturbed. we will fight and die before we will give up and run. these people, they did not want
their country or they would've stood there. i don't care if they are throwing rocks at the taliban. that would've run out there and committed suicide amongst them to save their country. but they didn't. i will tell you like this. i don't want any of them in this country if they're not willing to defend their own country. i saw hundreds of not thousand fighting age man -- i saw hundreds if not thousands fighting age man running and it's sad they are unwilling to fight for their own country. we did not need to be there. that's the end of my comment. guest: i want to thank you for your comments. i want to thank you for your service. i empathize with your comment that there is a great deal of disappointment and what has happened. an abject surrender.
many of us thought there would be a civil war, especially in afghanistan cities and the provincial capitals. to see it all surrendered that way is really disappointing. one thing that hasn't been brought up that is worth thinking about and remembering is the fact that the afghan president fled when the taliban were on the gates of kabul. he fled and deserted his people. that led to the rapid takeover. that ultimately was a comradely -- cowardly act on his part.
his people have and will suffer greatly for that act of cowardice either leader. host: greenville north carolina. it democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. my question is what is america deemed an evil participant and why hasn't the taliban been coined as the number one people source in this scenario? we knew that afghan could not put up a solid front. no one else is there as much as america's presence is. however, america is being deemed a villain. we are risking our lives and no
other country is, but we are the villains. guest: thank you for your question. i think nobody should be, nobody i know is saying something that negative about america. america was there. so were nato forces. so were forces from across the eu. they are all thanked for their service. i think what people are dismayed about is the takeover by the taliban and that is not an outcome anyone wanted. people are worried about the future of afghanistan. extreme heartbreak over what this means for afghanistan.
that's the first thing. i would say that the second thing is the worry about americans, american citizens, american diplomatic workers. also aid workers on the ground as well as the afghans who helped the u.s. in this fight. afghan interpreters, eligible for special visas. their lives are in danger and they will not be able to effect that they will not be able to be evacuated in time before this takeover. now there is this massive evacuation effort underway. i think that's what the concerns have been about. the effectiveness of that evacuation effort that has to be undertaken in such a scramble in the first place that it basically had not been undertaken over the previous months.
those are some of the real concerns. host: by the way, we are waiting to hear more on the evacuation efforts at 10:00 a.m. eastern. we will be taking you there alive -- live on c-span. plenty of coverage today about the ongoing developments in afghanistan at noon. we are going to be covering the washington institute east policy, the discussion that follows. afghanistan and what it means in the middle east. at 230 p.m. eastern, a conversation former marine officer. it discussion on the relocations of afghan refugees. all of that as well on the free c-span radio app. for the next five minutes or so, your questions with madiha afzal . taking your calls, brian is next
out of michigan. an independent, good morning. caller: i haven't spent a lot of time in the middle east, but that doesn't matter -- i've spent a lot of time in the middle east years ago, but that doesn't matter. there's plenty of blame to go around. that's why i'm an independent because i see it on both sides. bush and his crew invaded the land, afghanistan, which is the first time in american history we've done anything like that. then you're going to play a game of nationbuilding in afghanistan , a landlocked country. our power comes from the sea. that's why all of these costs were ridiculous from the start. at the end of 20 years, we don't even know, america doesn't even
know that you would at least need 10,000 if not 15,000 troops with air cap stations over it to protect the withdrawal from afghanistan. host: getting in and the first place and how we got out. guest: as i've said before, i think in retrospect, one can litigate including the fact that when we went into afghanistan to target al qaeda in 2001, the tele-band was in power. we took down, we targeted the tele-band -- the taliban. it left a vacuum in terms of the
government. we were pulled into nationbuilding which proved extremely difficult in a country like afghanistan. we have seen the cracks in the nationbuilding come to full light in recent weeks. my review had been throughout and you can read what i've written on this. the way to have undertaken this withdrawal would have been to maintain the few troops there with just 2500 3000. there was a slow process because they were so far apart they --
that a power-sharing agreement would have enabled us to lead more responsibly certainly we will be getting all americans out. there have been in particular again, but there could have been things that were done over the last two years including the trump administration that might not have led us to the moment we are at right now. host: less call. michael out of virginia --last call, michael out of virginia. caller: i'm confused with why we
did not have a better blueprint for pulling out of the area. we've done it once before and we did not have this massive craziness that's currently ensuing over there we basically had a blueprint for how to get out of the area that being said on the counter side given the taliban had a blueprint for taking the area over. we watched isis do it the last time. i feel like we left the area and now we made a bad player stronger. guest: thank you for your comments and your service. i think that this unfortunate
situation that we are in right now certainly may come from underestimating the military strategy of the taliban, overestimating security forces. while intelligence estimates had warned tele-band takeover might happen and perhaps sooner than later, i think no one thought that it could happen in 11 days. this has been a surprise to many. the administration says there were contingencies. this contingency was not considered a likely outcome of what would happen. everyone has been taken by surprise.
i think the fact that we did not engage the taliban push the tele-bed further in terms of a peace deal we did not have to take the may 1 deadline i've argued this as well and my writing. the tele-band -- the -- had we pushed the taliban to the table, we underestimated the tele-bands -- taliban military strategy. we overestimated the afghan security forces. one could go back and outline where this underestimation of the taliban was and overestimation of the afghan military came from, but we went
with what was the most likely outcome. unfortunately, it did not come to pass and sadly we are at the position we are at today. host: madiha afzal, a foreign policy fellow with workings institution. check out her book. we appreciate your time this morning. guest: thank you. host: up next, we let you lead the discussion. it is our open forum. the lines for republicans, 202-748-8001. at democrats, 202-748-8000. independent, 202-748-8002. let us know what political, public policy, issue you want to discuss. start calling in now and we will be right back.
>> if you choose to research the origins of a topic being discussed frequently in the united states in recent months called critical race theory, you will find the name derek bell. at law professor bell who died in 2011 was one of the principal originators of this much discussed subjects. 1992, he discussed the -- he appeared to discuss his book faces at the bottom of the well. >> the late derek bell, this episode on book notes plus. or wherever you get your podcast. >> walking from washington dc to
new york city, former wall street reporter neil king reflects on his nearly 300 mile journey. >> a year later with all of this happening, all of us being shut in, all of us walking around behind masks. that long covid winter. the events we saw play out january 6. the contested elections. there's a lot of blood in the air overall. i think it was the fifth day of spring and walked and looked up close and -- looked up close at the country and try to understand. >> neil king on his nearly 300 mile journey. it walking from washington dc to new york city, sunday 8 p.m. eastern on c-span q&a.
>> washington journal continues. host: it's just after 9:30 a.m. on the east coast. it is the part of the show where we turn the reins over to you. what's happening in your state? phone lines are open. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8002 -- democrats, 202-748-8000. independent, 202-748-8002. the number of americans and u.s. allies being taken out expected to be discussed. it reporters with their
questions already arriving ahead of that press briefing. that is happening at 10:00. it is time for your phone calls. joe is up first. democrat, what's on your mind? caller: i have a question and a comment. my question is when will c-span stop featuring what is happening in afghanistan? to me, it is causing a longer political divide. there are other things that are important in the united states and in the world. one of which is what is happening in haiti. that is a poor country. they are in peril not of their own doing. we are not giving enough attention to that country.
in my opinion, because it is a black country. it is unfortunate that we don't give attention to those people who really can't help themselves and giving more attention to afghanistan where they refused to help themselves. thank you. host: this is charlie in chicago. democrat, good morning. caller: good morning. my question a comment was what happened to the afghan soldiers? they should have had thousands. they just put their guns down and left. what happened to them? you had thousands of soldiers.
they lay there guns down. gave them airplanes, gave them everything. that was planned. the afghans are now the taliban. host: why did we know that this would happen? those answers asked yesterday at the pentagon. here's how he answered some of those questions. >> let me make one comment on the intelligence because i've seen all of the news that there were warnings of a rapid collapse. i have previously said from this podium and in sworn testimony before congress that the intelligence clearly indicated multiple scenarios where possible. one of those was an outright tele-band takeover following a rapid collapse of security forces in the government. another was a civil war. the third was a negotiated
settlement. however, the timeframe of a rapid collapse, that was widely estimated and ranged from weeks to months and even years. following our departure. there was nothing that i or anyone else saw the indicated a collapse of this army and this government in 11 days. central command submitted a variety of plans that were briefed and approved. these plans were coordinated, synchronized and rehearsed. one of those contingencies is what we are executing right now. host: yesterday at the pentagon, and we are expecting another briefing this morning at 10:00 eastern. the ground for that discussion on c-span. you can watch it live.
unix, arizona. -- independent -- phoenix, arizona. independent. good morning. caller: i feel very sad about the whole thing and i wanted to say that i was watching something last night and you can look at it both ways because i'm not a soldier. i don't know what they have to go through. but a lot of soldiers are like we did not do our best. we failed. but then another guy that had been doing a couple of tours of duty says you've got to look at it this way. someone told you you have cancer and they can help you for the next 20 years of your life. at least you got 20 good years.
it's up to you what you want to do with it. it's just sad. maybe they just, those taliban people are horrible. i would be scared of them. it's like the devil standing in front of you. host: this is joseph and virginia. republican, what's on your mind? caller: i heard somebody yesterday compare joe biden to mr. magoo. that's pretty good. joe biden does not know what the hell he's doing. he's an empty suit. for him to turn his back on the american people yesterday and walk away without answering
questions, the american people will turn their back on you one day soon mr. biden. uri has been. you never were. thank you very much -- you never were. thank you very much. host: good morning. caller: i would like to make a statement. came from our very first resident. the statement was the worst thing that we could do is to form political parties. that would bring division among the people in this country. those statement, the statement he has made has came true. i would like to say god have mercy on this country and let us return to and godly trust. -- in god we trust. host: good morning.
caller: what i was saying is this thing that happened in afghanistan, it's not so much a failure of preparation. it the failure of understanding all the factors that are supposed to be happening there. we went to war because we wanted to protect our country from a place where terrorism is being used as their nursery. that is where they get their worriers and everything else. next, the thing is war is the use of force. kill or be killed. we had soldiers that died there.
at least we were able to get our mission done. unfortunately, the thing we forgot to understand is afghanistan is composed of hundreds of tribes, different tribes. different levels of understanding what life is all about. to them, life is what force can put on them like the use of fear which is basically what terrorism is all about. host: raymond is in georgia, republican. the morning. caller: i've got one statement and i was want to ask a question. biden said he did not want to leave this messed for another
president. i think he should have because he would've done better. my question is, you don't leave guns to your enemies to use back on you. all this equipment that they've used, that they've gave them. the high tech equipment that we may have to fight against our own machinery now, can they take and maybe sell this equipment to our enemies? or maybe even take over other countries with it? that's what my question is. host: about 15 minutes left. 15 minutes before we take you over to the pentagon for a press briefing. some news on the homefront about new jobless claims in the past week. applications fell by 29,000 last week and hit a post lot down low.
-- hit a post-lockdown low. claims have fallen to the lowest level since march 14 of 2000 -- march 14, 2020. reporting on that news out of the labor department. david is in denver. democrat, good morning. caller: good morning. i've got several mixed emotions about it, but i think we can feel good that we gave it a try. i know a lot of people are angry about the blood and the money
that we left over there, but we did give it a try. host: did we try for too long? 20 years? caller: i think we probably did, especially after we got bin laden. but we didn't give it a try. maybe it's a little bit like the space program where we could look back on that and say yeah, that is something we did well. in this instance, we did try. we did our best. the thing is unraveling now. we are finding out that maybe some of our money was misspent, that we were paying people off, warlords. i don't feel bad about the fact that we tried. yes, resources could have been used but we did try. as far as
host: this it shock you -- does it shock you that roughly two thirds of americans say they don't think the war in afghanistan was worth fighting? you are saying that we should at least be proud that we tried. at 66% of americans saying they don't think the war was worth fighting. caller: i guess i'm in the one third of americans that feel that we saw a problem, we tried to make into south korea. we gave it our best effort and it did not work. no, i'm not going to say everything we did over the past 20 years was a waste. host: thanks for the call. sam and rhode island. republican, good morning. caller: good morning.
if this was during the trump administration, they would have been all over him. host: i apologize for that. david in michigan. independent, good morning. caller: good morning. i don't understand why these people are blaming the president. that's why he has a chief of staff and national security. as a general said, we did not see it coming. what is the president supposed to do? go against the recommendations? host: bob, rollie. republican --raleigh. caller: biden terrifies me. he appears to be, when i see his
presentation and his explanation he seems so weak. he walks away from the podium. he doesn't answer any questions. what kind of president does that? kamala harris is completely absent. to me, it almost appears they are staging all of this so that she can take over and not have been involved in any of this. it scares me. things -- look at the things are going on. the borders are a crisis. nobody denies that. biden made the decision to go. trump put that stuff in space. -- trump put that stuff in place, but he could have changed it. who are these people he put in place? if they can't be trusted, he can't be trusted to make those kind of judgments. it's all scary to me, not to mention inflation and all of these other things. the fires. what a disaster that is. nobody is blaming him for anything. he gets no blame for anything in
spite of the fact that he is just not, it's very scary to me. i am scared to death for our country. host: that's bob in north carolina. this is coleman in baton rouge. good morning. caller: it's actually clinton, but that's ok. i'm aware of most of the conversations touching on the afghan at the current moment. it's easy in hindsight to pass a lot of judgments on decisions made, but my comment was more so something i would like to point out. i'm seeing something happening that i believe most are not understanding in terms of, we've gotten so adjusted to our capitalist economy driving certain things without realizing that to secure and take care of the businesses out of fear of them leaving it does close up the market that someone without
knowledge of an individual in connection or a lot of money, you are not getting into that group if you are not willing to play in the way that they play which every business model in this nation is set to keep the most at the top. if that's happening, it's inevitable that you cannot trickle down to the masses when the top is keeping all of it to begin with. host: what line of work are you in? caller: i come from construction, but i'm an inventor and i've got a couple of u.s. patents sitting around with nothing because i want to provide a good product -- a good quality product for the masses and they don't like that and i had to go away. host: what is something you have invented? caller: the product is a platform system. it's a standing platform system.
since my process was going to be done with the humanitarian nature him the business affiliates -- humanitarian nature, the business affiliates took my business away from me. i -- they are taking away our rights to be able to do business the way we want. host: thank you for the call from louisiana. ryan and albuquerque, independent. good morning. caller: let's remember that part of the justification for starting this war with iraq, with afghanistan, was because it was a failed state where the terrorists had come from. in reality, it was a failed state that wealthy golf state
like the saudi's have put money into to fund the terrorist training camps. now here we are, afghanistan is once again a failed state and will be run by the taliban, terrorist organization. we are starting from zero. to me, it brings up another, ties into another problem and that controlling immigration. now we have a failed state country in the middle east that's going to be turning out extremists, going around the world, sneaking into united states. which was the whole justification for starting war with afghanistan. we are back at square one. i hope, you are approaching 20 years to the 9/11 attack. i hope that c-span brings on serious people to talk about what really precipitated that attack. who was behind it, like the
saudi's for instance. all the mistakes that were made in response to it. george w. bush bears the biggest amount of responsibility, him and dick cheney. they seized on this attack as an excuse to get the war they really wanted. the where they really wanted was the prize. they got it. that was another disaster. let's look at all of the state that bush made protecting the saudi's, his buddies. they did not want the american public to understand how bad saudi arabia really is. host: new mexico, a couple of comments via text messaging service. dan in pennsylvania, some may say the war in afghanistan was good for weapons manufacturers. this from victoria in florida, she's a soldier. never leave a comrade behind.
those afghan men fought the hot -- fought beside us. we gave them an oath. you are now our brother. we failed them. an update for you on that pentagon press briefing. it has been pushed to 10:30 a.m. we will still air it on c-span. we will end it as we usually do at 10:00 eastern. there is that 2:30 a.m. press briefing. -- 10:30 a.m. press briefing. at 2:30 p.m. eastern, conversation with the democrat from massachusetts, a former marine officer on the relocation of afghan refugees in the united states. that on c-span, c-span.org and
the freight c-span radio app. new jersey, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. i just want to say one thing. leaving people behind, they were told months in advance that this withdrawal would happen. they were advised to leave the country. the people that state in the country just started to do that of their own volition. they chose to stay there. they are no victims in this. host: would you apply that to embassy staff and other government? caller: embassy staff applies to that job. the risks involved with being involved in a conflict zone, they accept certain risks of their job. they do not have to keep that job. they could quit that job if they wanted to. if i were working in that office
, this looks like it's falling apart. let's all plan to get out of here. i do believe that a diplomatic staff will be able to get out of afghanistan unharmed. they are staying there because they said this deserves our attention. at least i hope that's how diplomatic staff will behave. a registered nurse being told to take care of a patient. the nurse has a choice, and in the goodness of her profession she will take care of the patient because it was her job. host: christopher, ann arbor, michigan. you are next. caller: good morning. i want to thank brian lamb for c-span and all the workers for c-span. all you guys do such a good job. i agree with when the session
opened, black women that spoke about haiti. i agree -- i agree with her comment. secondly, i support joe biden. the end of this war was not what he wanted or what anyone wanted, but i support him because he had the kahunas to bring this war, this theater of war to a close and that is a strength that we are not talking about. 20 years ago, this all should have been shut down. no one had the nerve. no one had the guts. democrats or republicans. joe biden, vice president harris brought it to a close. host: christopher.
our last color. we will be back here tomorrow -- our last caller. we will be back here tomorrow. in the meantime how -- in the meantime, have a great thursday. national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2021] >> representative seth moulton of massachusetts talks about efforts to relocate afghans due to the taliban takeover of their country. live coverage today at 2:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. online at c-span.org or listen on the free c-span radio app.
>> sunday, the c-span series, january 6, views from the house, continues. two more members of congress share stories about what they saw, heard, and experienced that day, including susan wild, who accounts what happened during the early moments on the house floor. >> i don't remember how long we were in that situation between the time they barricaded the door and when we got out. jason told me it was somewhere like 20 minutes. it could have been two hours or five minute. i had no sense of time whatsoever. but i remember that when i got off the phone with my kids, i told him that my heart is pounding out of my chest. i felt, i was actually very worried that i was having a heart attack. i've never had a heart attack but we have a family history. i was kind of worried, was very worried about that.
i must have put my hand up to my chest, because that photograph of me that was taken shows me lying on my stomach with my hand on my chest. i don't remember lying on my back. but i do remember jason taking my hand and just stroking it and kind of comforting me and telling me i would be ok and being a little bit perplexed that he was reassuring me because i didn't realized i was showing how upset i was. >> this week you will also hear from jim mcgovern. january 6, views from the house, sunday at 10 p.m. eastern on c-span, c-span.org, or listen on the c-span radio app. >> c-span is your unfiltered you of government. we are funded by these television companies and more, including buckeye broadband.