because the security in afghanistan the stability of afghanistan is not only for afghanistan it took effect disability and security of the region including russia so wonderful are a product of our foreign policy to fight against terrorism and extremism and stability of afghanistan in the region is regional cooperation because the fight against terrorism and extremism is not only individual afghanistan it is a regional issue so if you cannot find a solution the additional solution for it will be in deep trouble because that will continue until the longest time is nato presence threatening your internal security in relations to your immediate neighbors we have. being working through day one to ensure sure our neighbors that the presence of new to a life force in afghanistan for security and stability in afghanistan for the fight against terrorism and extremism is not directed against any other country and so far you have kept that reassuring god we need to have a regional competition as i mentioned to to defeat terrorism extremism kabul has very good relations with washington and with

is there a future for afghanistan? an open interview with president hamid karzai is next on larry king. great mrepleasure to welcome to larry king president hamid karzai. he is the president of afghanistan. he comes to us from the presidential palace in kabul. thank you for being with us. we've just marked the ninth anniversary of this war. did you ever think it would take so long? >> no, sir. i never thought it was going to take so long. in 2001 when this whole effort against extremism and terrorism began, the afghan people and the international community joined hands and the victory came within a month and a half. subsequent to that, we all felt that now it was going to be the rebuilding of afghanistan and towards a more secure, brighter future. parts of it we achieved. parts it which was security and the absolute defeat of terrorism, not yet. >> larry: many americans, as you know, mr. president, are anxious about our being there. many are asking, what is the united states' purpose? what can we still achieve in your

when we're fighting them in afghanistan, it's a war. but when they kill 3,000 americans here and go back someplace and they're difficult to get ahold of and move from one country or another. the congress of the united states has authorized the president to kill them or capture them whenever they are because of what they can do to us. that gives us special powers to do that. we believe we're fighting a war against that enemy even though at times it was in iraq, times it was in afghanistan. some of it is in pakistan. some of it is in other places. we believe that meets the definition. >> okay, we're going another question here. >> sure. >> first off i want to thank the panel for speaking to us tonight. and this question is for all three panelists. general mcmaster, you mentioned the necessity to have -- set your objectives ahead of time and presumably that imperative applies to war or states of emergency or whatever conflict and however you describe it. >> in the military, we're going to go no matter what you call it. we're going. [laughi

change afghanistan enormous costs and you've changed afghanistan period. afghanistan does not resonate. >> i have the greatest respect for tom ridge. excuse me. tom ricks, i have the greatest report for. mr. friedman was wrong about iraq. he said we couldn't succeed in iraq. we would fail and had to withdraw. enough said. >> the question still stands. what do you win if you win? how does it resonate? >> you win stability in the region. you win a reduction in the threat of radical islamic extremism. you win elimination of a goal for attacks on the united states of america. clearly taliban and al qaeda would work together if we were able to succeed and you don't send a message of an american defeat which would reverbrate throughout the region and the word. i'm confident with the right kind of military and civilian team in kabul that we can succeed and it will be long and hard and tough. >> do we stick it out at any costs? >> i sound tough to you but i just talked on the phone to a young man who is an amputee. i met him at walter reed. he's now at bethesda. i

we face a very tough fight in afghanistan. americans do not flinch in the face of difficult truths or difficult tasks. we persevere. we will not tolerate a safe haven for terrorists who want to destroy afghan society from within and launch attacks against innocent man, women, and children in our country and around the world. make no mistake -- we have a clear goal. we will break the taliban's momentum. we will build an afghan capacity. we will relentlessly applied pressure on al-qaida and its leadership, strengthening the ability of both afghanistan and pakistan to do the same per. that is the strategy we agreed to last fall and that is the policy we are carrying out in afghanistan and pakistan. in that effort, we are honored to be joined by allies and partners who have stood by us to pay the ultimate price through loss of their young people to war. they are with us because the interests and values that we share and because this mission is fundamental to the ability of free people to live in peace and security in the 21st cent

military in afghanistan. "mr. mortenson who for a time lived out of his car in berkeley, california has spoeng at dozen of military bases, seen his books on required reading lists for military commanders and had lunch with general david petraeus. he was recently in florida at centcom headquarters and met with the head of special operations command. his new book is "stones into schools, promoting peace with books not bombs in afghanistan and pakistan." here is our conversation with him, taped yesterday. a pleasure to meet you. very much so. for a man who tries to scale k-2 and find himself in a village of people who bring him back, so to speak and then -- pick up the story. >> 1993, i went to k-2 -- i went there in honor of my sister krista who died from epilepsy, to honor her, i got within 600 meters of the summit, didn't quite make it to the top so i came off the mountain and i was very weak and emaciated and i walked five days and i stumbled into a little village called korfe where i was befriended by the people

why afghanistan? there are so many other areas around the world where there is gender inequality. why afghanistan? >> afghanistan is one of the top -- in terms of the worst of the worst for gender inequality and women's rights. but i think it's a place where women can be the solutions. i think there is a ripple effect that can be implemented in afghanistan. and it's a country that certainly is of great need. >> help people understand as well. i'm sure you were probably the same way. so many people would like to help out in so many places around the world. but quite frankly, they just don't know what to do or how to do it or have the courage to drop everything and go. now, what was your challenge? you essentially gave up a life in denver to make this now our new life's work. >> i did. i decided to literally make the leap. and it does take a big leap of faith because it's giving up the norm. it's giving up a home. it's giving up a lot. but i believe that the people that we are working to help deserve th

afghanistan, not the case. there were leaked memos from the embassy in kabul that our ambassador had his own idea about what would work and would not work in afghanistan and he did not think the counterinsurgency strategy would work. they had a problem. for a couple of reasons, they did not see eye to eye with the u.s. commander. the commanders are now the nato commanders and they do not answer to the u.s. ambassador. it is a coalition warfare with all the problems that it entails. there was the u.k. advisor -- ambassador to kabul. but i do not think that we really thought through -- if we think that we could do this politically and operationally, how we organize our team to use a little leverage? adding the other team, we need a coordinator to coordinate afghanistan and pakistan policy. if you're one to be an on board, you probably need to be in the region. you cannot just me with one guy. you have to sit down and get to know somebody and have launched multiple times. after you establish a relationship of trus

is fighting for the wrong cause in afghanistan and paying too big a price for that i. every month we give you the future we help you understand how to get there and what tomorrow brings the best in science and technology from across russia and around the world join us acknowledging update on our jeep. our stop we are going to come back. we'll have a rally will sell lots of beer will wrong wrong they will wear uniforms that will damage is down the black for them moving but very little damming to white. and they are the key to our problem are already. wealthy british. markets. find out what's really happening to the global economy for a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune in to cause a report on our. fifty five. ft. a pullout a triple bombing in baghdad and dozens dead bring doubts over whether romney forces and manage in the wake of the withdraw all u.s. combat troops. instant karma the internet's rise in russia with more people to highlight problems like crime and drugs and that in the past might have been overlooked. also what a house is not a

of course, we have afghanistan on top of that, which is even bigger. just to pause for a moment on the retrograde from iraq , it is not as large in terms of tonnage as was the retrograde from iraq after desert storm, however, it takes place in a -- on a particular timetable, we need to get down to certain level by august. it takes place in hand environment where there is still threat. it goes on while we are continuing to operate. and -- i don't think this is inconsequential, the retrograde from iraq takes place after being there for many years, so this wasn't like checking out of a hotel that you had been in for a short time, as in iraq of a desert storm. this is like leaving a home you've lived in for a while. we were more settled in, more equipment. and -- so we had a lot to do. we started out with 350 fobs in iraq . about a year ago, and we're closing them, getting those numbers down. 147,000 contractors by the way. now down to about 100,000, going down to about 75,000. you know the troop levels will be going down to 50,000. 3.4 million items of eq

brings together afghanistan to she can stand. to discuss how to cool drug trafficking terrorism and settle into with. the major cool's of instability. classes are held every day despite the time of year and weather conditions right now it's extremely odd to hear but if you can see the troops are dressed in their uniform will have to get used to it since this is what they'll have to wear on the job takes me to the front line of the county drugs finds who want to go it's a put through tough training for the mission ahead. i started to look at the american history of old ticks and realize it but old boyhood would like to ideals gone sour all hundreds of us nationals who nerika dreamhouse failed them and choose to denounce those bits and say. also coming up in the business of the past so fine you should have no real cynical. example of find out why area between the world and that's an area i don't know about and. a very warm welcome to you this is almost the line from the russian capital i'm alice habit police in moscow have been put

of russia for peace and security in afghanistan because the security in afghanistan the stability of afghanistan is not only for afghanistan it took effect disability and security of the region including russia so wonderful our product in war foreign policy the fight against terrorism and extremism and stability of afghanistan in the region is regional cooperation because the fight against terrorism and extremism is not only individual afghanistan it is a regional issue so if you cannot find a solution in addition to a solution for it we'll be in deep trouble because that will continue and take longer time is nato presence threatening going terminal security in relations to your immediate neighbors who we have. been working through the worm to sure sure our neighbors the presence of new to allied forces in afghanistan is for security and stability in afghanistan for the fight against terrorism and extremism is not directed against any other country and so far you have kept it reassuring gordon it would be neat to have a regional cooperation as i mentioned to to defeat terrorism extre

>> can we stay on afghanistan? >> you want to stay on afghanistan? >> the ambassador mentioned a piece jirga coming later this month. what does the u.s. want to see out of that specifically? >> i know that's going to be a topic of discussion will get a chance to talk about it after the two leaders talk about it. >> alright, a follow-up then. the ambassador also mentioned the need to improve accountability. what needs to happen that demonstrates that? >> again, there are a series of things that president karzai has outlined. there are things that we have asked for. not all of which i'm going to get into. >> can you give a couple of examples? >> i would point you to what ambassador eikenberry talked about in terms of improving the run-up to parliamentary elections as important steps for the government. >> given the fact that everything we have heard this morning suggest that this is definitely a work in progress and eshoo said, not going all that quickly, what confidence do you have it by the time american troops are ready to leave, according to the sc

came to afghanistan to liberate afghanistan from different of the taliban. carelessness for some tremendous challenges to rebuild the south because for thirty years of the war the country which solidly was a poor country has been completely destroyed for the challengers the hard rebuilding the country giving the normal life toward people who are our children go to school to have a health care i try but you cation. that this what you're trying to do now would or friends british defense chief general sir david richards said that nato should prepare for another thirty forty years to stay in afghanistan which makes and mockery of the plans transition in two thousand and fourteen why do you think nato changed its strategy and do you think that strategy defeating the tribal opposition was right in the first place number one it's not a tribal position it is a fight against terrorism and extremism and to try. chief in the tribal people of the first victim of terrorism which are being killed every day. date of two thousand and fourteen afghan proposal president karza

is there a future for afghanistan? an open interview with president hamid karzai is next on larry king. great pleasure to welcome to larry king president hamid karzai. he is the president of afghanistan. he comes to us from the presidential palace in kabul. thank you for being with us. we've just marked the ninth anniversary of this war. did you ever think it would take so long? >> no, sir. i never thought it was going to take so long. in 2001 when this whole effort against extremism and terrorism began, the afghan people and the international community joined hands and the victory came within a month and a half. subsequent to that, we all felt that now it was going to be the rebuilding of afghanistan and towards a more secure, brighter future. parts of it we achieved. parts it which was security and the absolute defeat of terrorism, not yet. >> larry: many americans, as you know, mr. president, are anxious about our being there. many are asking, what is the united states' purpose? what can we still achieve in your cou

because the security in afghanistan the stability of afghanistan is not only for afghanistan it took effect disability and security of the region including russia so wonderful our product involved foreign policy the fight against terrorism and extremism and stability of afghanistan in the region is a vision of corporate because the fight against terrorism and extremism is not only individual afghanistan it is a regional issue so if you cannot find a solution their vision or solution for it we'll be in deep trouble because that will continue and take longer time is nato presence threatening your internal security in relations to your immediate neighbors who we have. working from day one to sure sure our neighbors that the presence of new to allied force in afghanistan is for security and stability in afghanistan for the fight against terrorism and extremism is not directed against any other country and so far we have kept it reassuring gordon it would we need to have regional cooperation as i mentioned to to defeat terrorism extremism the couple has very good relations with washington

because the security in afghanistan the stability of afghanistan is not only for afghanistan it took effect disability and security of the region including russia so wonderful our product involved foreign policy in the fight against terrorism and extremism and stability of afghanistan is a region of cooperation because the fight against terrorism and extremism is not only individual afghanistan it is a regional issue so if you cannot find a solution there vision a solution for it we'll be in deep trouble because that will continue and take longer time is nato presence threatening your internal security in relations to your immediate neighbors we have. working through dewormed sure sure our neighbors that the presence of need to a life force in afghanistan is for security and stability in afghanistan for the fight against terrorism and extremism is not directed against any other country and so far we have kept it reassuring gordon it would we need to have a regional cooperation as i mentioned to to defeat terrorism extremism kabul has very good relations with washington and with tehra

>> well, the honorable member know we arehere in afghanistan at the invitation of afghanistan and a united nations mandate. we are not seeking to conquer afghanistan. it clearly is impossible. you only have to fly over and look down at the deserts and mountain ranges to know in a moment that it is not possible to conquer afghanistan but it should be possible to provide necessary support for the government of afghanistan to be able to conduct its own security and provide for the future of its own people. and the honorable member is right that there is great public concern about this. i don't want to minimize the difficulties or imply that things are easier than they are. but i do believe that if these three things are pursued successfully together, the military strategy, the economic strategy, and a political process, then it is possible not to have a purely military success but to succeed in our objective of an afghanistan that can look after its own security. >> does the foreign secretary accept that what the public will now regard as a timetable for the withdrawal of british troops will

the counterinsurgency in afghanistan will be won or lost in the local communities of rural afghanistan, not unusualan centers such as kabul, says the brookings institution. now, someone i'm not used to quoting. george will wrote in "the washington post" that, quote, counterinsurgency theory concerning the time and ratio required to protect the population indicates that nationwide afghanistan would need hundreds of thousands of coalition troops, perhaps for a decade or more. that is inconceivable. unquote. for how long are we willing to dedicate billions of dollars and thousands of lives before we realize we can't win afghanistan militarily? our biggest mistake in the afghanistan strategy is to think we can separate the taliban from the rest of the population. we cannot. the taliban is a local resistance movement that part in par sell of an inthe distinguished gentleman from nant population. we lost vietnam because we did not provide them with a competent government that provided them with basic security and a decent living. the strategy for winning afghanistan is simple. stop killing t

abandoning the afghanistan -- abandoning afghanistan just when we bear fruit i think would be a mistake. and although i appreciate the gentleman's leadership and incisive analysis which bears listening to, on this issue we disagree. and i would urge therefore my colleagues to vote no on the resolution before us and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from ohio is recognized. mr. kucinich: i want to thank our majority leader for his participation and also for his cooperation in assuring that this debate could happen. you and our speaker and mr. berman are appreciated for your willingness to provide for this moment to happen so that the house could be heard from. so, thank you. i would ask, madam speaker, how much time remains in the debate? i'm sure we're winding down here. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio has 13 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from california has nine minutes remaining and the gentlelady from florida has five minutes remaining. mr. kucinich: i yield myself three minutes. the speaker pro t

so afghanistan stores a huge amount of drugs russia and other countries estimate it's about thirteen to fifteen thousand tons of opium so even if drug production stops in afghanistan the country will still be able to supply the international market with heroin for another twenty or even thirty years. what about the main mode of transportation of the drugs could you talk about the roads or the countries to which the drug trade flows into russia. out of i.c.u. there is the northern route which is sometimes called the northern silk route after the seventeenth century trade route the reason the silk route is popular is because after the collapse of the soviet union new nations are merged and while their borders exist on paper in reality they're not even properly guarded so essentially there are no effective borders between afghanistan and russia with such poor borders it's very easy for traffickers to transport drugs the biggest part of drugs flows through stan and kazakstan and onward to russia another part goes through iran across the caspian sea and the caucasus ridge and ends up. nor

the world are unable to consume everything that comes out of afghanistan so afghanistan stores a huge amount of drugs russia and other countries estimate it's about thirteen to fifteen thousand tonnes of opium so even if drug production stops in afghanistan the country will still be able to supply the international market with heroin for another twenty or even thirty years so what about the main mode of transportation of the drugs could you talk about the roads or the countries through which the drug trade flows into russia. out of i.c.u. there is the northern route which is sometimes called the northern silk route after the seventeenth century trade route the reason the silk route is popular is because after the collapse of the soviet union new nations are merged and while their borders exist on paper in reality they're not even probably guarded so essentially there are no effective borders between afghanistan and russia with such poor borders it's very easy for traffickers to transport drugs the biggest part of drugs flows through down and kazakstan and onward to russia another part

afghanistan and came inside afghanistan we will do our things our job to deduce and eliminate poppy cultivation afghanistan but also a world in the region should do did it for to reduce the demand because because because the demand the production of poppies there so it's a common if word of reducing the cultivation giving too far out of afghanistan the alternative which they would accept to two groups something poppy but also working to reduce the consumption and the demand for the trucks. watch the full interview with the afghan foreign minister coming your way this sunday here on r.t. meanwhile the latest pentagon report shows that violence in afghanistan has reshapes highest point in the nine years since the u.s. led invasion american military officials admit that progress in afghanistan has been limited with only modest gains made against the taliban leadership are now based in pakistan his policy or looks at the relocation of u.s. forces from iraq to afghanistan the latest attempt to break the deadlock. i will what she's trying to do is coming to an end he's part of the america

ramification for the afghanistan policy. earlier today, the nation's top defense officials said they fully support the president's decision to replace general mcchrystal with general david petraeus. speaking at the pentagon, secretary of defense robert gates and chairman of the joint chiefs of staff admiral mike mullen spoke about the event that led to general mcchrystal's resignation. >> i believe the poor judgment exercise bid general mcchrystal with regard to the "rolling stone" profile has made his continued service in that post and as a member of the national security team untenable. >> the statements and attitudes reported in the news media are unacceptable under our form of government and are inconsistent with the high standards expected of military leaders. as i said tuesday, our troops and coalition partners are making extraordinary sacrifices in the fight against al qaeda and its extremistist allies. our singular focus must be on succeeding in this mission without distraction or division. >> honestly, when i first

to be in afghanistan, because the taliban is not in afghanistan. >> i agree there's not enough focus being pushed on to some of these questions about governance and the rule of law. too much focus on handing over to the afghan security forces without really looking at or trying to shape the political environments that underlies much of the conflict that we're seeing. i was just in kandahar a couple of weeks ago and looking into some more recent allegations of human rights abuses by rasick, and i think it sends a terrible message that this was the year that the u.s. and nato, looking at going into kandahar and sorting out governance, and look who their partner is. it's a man notorious for past human rights abuses, narcotics smuggling, a whole host of problems. and this is the man that they're standing shoulder to shoulder with. >> a lot of the reason why we've been so dependent on these malign actors is because we have not had a lot of our own troops in afghanistan. we have not been able to exert our own power or put a lot of money and effort into training the al qaeda security forces

as a stable one in afghanistan. today if you are in pakistan and a national security adviser or and afghan adviser to president karzai, you are operating under the assumption that the u.s. is leaving. the clock is running out. we have to dispel that notion. >> nato said 2014. from 2010, that looks far off, but all the sudden time tends to creep up. does that not still send that message? we are exiting. >> platts acknowledge there were we were this time last year, we were talking about -- let's acknowledge where we were "the star-ledger" we were talking about 2011. it spurred a movement on the part of the afghan government. i think it was a strategic blunder to put that 2011 marker out there in the december 1 speech. >> do you agree? >> i think it has worked against our interests. >> that is less than a strategic blunder. >> 12 months later, we are talking about 2014. we were able to get nato allies to commit to 2014. the genesis of that 2014 state came from president karzai, from his second inaugural address. one of

we do in afghanistan. the plan is for them to draw down significantly by this summer and be out of their completely by next year. much of that will the plan on security conditions on the ground. host: mike, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. the previous caller was exactly right. why are we there? host: enter your own question. -- answer your own question. caller: the military industrial complex is too fat. we will not allow. host: brief comments there. jesse, -- we will not pull out . host: brief comments there. jesse, north carolina. caller: we may withdraw a token amount of troops in iraq. we have troops in afghanistan with a partnership with pakistan. all of these countries around iran. to what extent does the gentleman think our presence in the middle east have to do with iran? guest: first of all, the withdrawal from iraq is not a token. they are likely to keep drawing down very significantly. going down to about 50,000. next year continuing to do so. i also do not think that our pre

we're in afghanistan because if we fail in afghanistan, it will have a direct, immediate danger to us. it will increase al qaeda's worldwide reach. they will come back with the taliban in all likelihood and they will gain a worldwide success which will be very dangerous for our national security interests. so we have to be clear. the american public needs to be clear on why we're in afghanistan. this is not vietnam, a war which i participated in as a state department civilian. this is not the balkans. it's not iraq. this is quite different. this one relates directly to our safety at home. and so you've identified and picked out the number one weak link in our chain. and, luckily for us, so has this administration, starting with the team we've mentioned, david petraeus, general caldwell, general mcdonald, and other people through the chain of command. we're really focused on the police. i can also tell you that in the policy review last fall, which president obama personally conducted, which was the most intense policy review i've ever been involved in, we spent more time on the issue

and security in afghanistan because the security in afghanistan the stability of afghanistan is not only for afghanistan it took effect disability and security of the region including russia so one off war product in war foreign policy the fight against terrorism and extremism and stability of afghanistan in the region is regional cooperation because the fight against terrorism and extremism is not only individual afghanistan it is a regional issue so if you cannot find a solution in addition to a solution for it we'll be in deep trouble because that will continue until a longer time sir he told the un general assembly and i quote you to complement our efforts towards eliminating poppy production who wish to see greater action to counter smuggling of precursors into our country and to reduce demand and consumption of drugs in other countries as of today over two and a half million russians are addicted to afghan heroin this is where mr why has your administration and your allies failed to tackle the poppy production first of all the poppy production in afghanistan have to result of thirt

afghanistan is not as. of course, making it much easier for the girls, unlike iraq the afghan taliban have a sanctuary in pakistan. which is supposedly our ally, but which only goes after the pakistani taliban and not be afghan taliban. the afghan taliban is always useful to the pakistani government to counter the indian influence in afghanistan, especially when the u.s. is likely to leave as the president signaled his intention to at least are pulling out troops by 2011. so that was i think a message to the pakistanis that perhaps the elements of the pakistani military, that they should keep supporting the afghan taliban. now in iraq, the insurgency was primarily urban, whereas in afghanistan it's a rural. because of the war, the civil war and the assassinations, in addition, the tribal leadership is weaker in iraq -- or is weaker in afghanistan than in iraq, and there is no awakening movement and afghanistan. the taliban are afghans, who for the most part don't target civilians. whereas al qaeda and iraq

troops to afghanistan. the pulitzer prize winners inside account a discourse the issues and conflicts among several of the obama administration's key players. mr. woodward appeared briefly on c-span's "washington journal." the program is 45 minutes. >> host: and on this friday morning the "washington journal" is pleased to welcome bob woodward of the "washington post" here to talk with you about his latest book about presidential leadership at a time of war and it's called "obama's wars." mr. woodward, thanks for being here guessed that thank you. >> host: i watch your chart rose together and as i was telling you, i want to start a conversation with your very last thought on that program. i will play for our audience and pick up the conversation from there. let's listen in. >> right here is we are on thin ice, and that not enough has been done to clarify and set the direction of the war, which will not -- it's not just going to define in part the obama presidency your it's going to define where this country

because the security in afghanistan the stability of afghanistan is not only for afghanistan it took effect disability and security of the region including russia was so wonderful our product involved foreign policy in the fight against terrorism and extremism and stability of afghanistan in the region is a region of cooperation because the fight against terrorism and extremism is not only individual afghanistan it is a regional issue so if you cannot find a solution the additional solution for it will be in deep trouble because that will continue and take longer time is nato presence threatening your internal security in relations to your immediate neighbors who we have. working from day one to assure assure our neighbors that the presence of need to a life force in afghanistan is for security and stability in afghanistan for the fight against terrorism and extremism is not directed against any other country. and so far you have kept it reassuring gordon it would be neat to have a regional competition as i mentioned to to defeat terrorism extremism kabul has very good relations with

in the first place what are we doing making happy farmers in afghanistan or is our job to secure afghanistan stop the drug trafficking create alternative economies and then stop the killing that goes around the world both by the terrorists and by the drugs themselves have killed millions throughout asia and europe because of coming from afghanistan and pakistan which transits thirty percent of afghanistan's drugs we're creating crime we're creating addiction we are creating terror but it is a mission that can be achieved it's not going to create happy afghanistan farmers at first until they had to develop alternative economies but do they really want an economy that's a narco state do they really want an economy that's building dramatically the addiction in their own country and around the rest of the world is that the mission that we want or do we want to achieve an economically successful afghanistan pakistan and at the same time stop the drugs that create the terror the crime in the addiction that should be the mission that should be far more important than happy farmers in afghanistan th

>> they have ruled afghanistan for years. until the soviets arrived they predominantly subjugated the minorities. a dozen minority and ethnic groups. so the ethnic question in afghanistan has always been terribly important. karzai is a peshtoon. the taliban, also, are peshtoon. so in many ways this is a fight between two tribal groups. the peshtoons livelive under a tribal code and tribal hierarchy. one of the tests has been how to move this tribal hierarchy into a modern state structure. because the old kings of afghanistan are ruled by basically buying off the tribes. doing favors for one tribe, buying another one, whatever. and obviously you can't do this in a modern state structure. you want education, economy, and all the rest of it. this has been one of the challenges. >> let me read some of the decree. "if women are going outside with -- going outside with fashionable, ornamental, tight and charming clothes to show themselves, they will be60h(ú÷ by the slamic sharia and should never expect to go to heaven." >> well,

so why afghanistan? why now? >> senior administration official says this is something that the president has wanted to do for quite some time and believed this is really a critical moment, coming off what they say was a successful effort in pushing the taliban mback in marjah and focusing in kandahar, also trying to push back on taliban. they believe that they need to get a viable partner there on the ground. the president wanted to sit down with hamid karzai there but the president said the reason he wanted to go there was meet directly with u.s. troops and thank them for the sacrifice. take a listen. >> i know that sometimes when you are watching tv, the politics back home may look a little messy, people yelling and hollering, democrats this and republicans that i want you to understand this, there's no daylight when it comes to support of all of you. there's no daylight when it comes to supporting our troops. >> now, in summarizing the meetings there, u.s. officials traveling with the president say that the me

>> they have ruled afghanistan for years. until the soviets arrived they predominantly subjugated the minorities. a dozen minority and ethnic groups. so the ethnic question in afghanistan has always been terribly important. in many ways this is a battle between two tribal groups of pashtuns. tribal code and tribal hierarchy. one of the tests has been how to move this tribal hierarchy into a modern state structure. because the old kings of afghanistan are ruled by basically buying off the tribes. doing favors for one tribe, buying another one, whatever. and obviously you can't do this in a modern state structure. you want education, economy, and all the rest of it. this has been one of the challenges. >> let me read some of the decree. "if women are going outside with -- going outside with fashionable, ornamental, tight and charming clothes to show themselves, they will be cursed by the slamic sharia and should never expect to go to heaven. >> well, this is the taliban in the 1990's when they were ruling the country. >> do the

i'm a correspondent from afghanistan. i'm not talking is a woman in afghanistan. as long as i have remembered, there are reasons that afghanistan is not civilized. you have talked about pakistan. the pakistan government is not honest regarding afghanistan. what is the new policy of the united states to solve this problem. i want to ask president hamid karzai, as well. [speaking farsi] thank you. >> i know you will translate that for us. [laughter] he is very good. [laughter] president hamid karzai and i have in the past met with the pakistani president. t, as well as their teams and emphasized to pakistan but fact that our security is intertwined. i think there has been, in the past, a view on the part of pakistan that their primary rival, india, was their only concern. i think what you have seen over the last several months is a growing recognition that they have a cancer in their midst, that the extremist organizations that have been allowed to congregate and use as a base the frontier areas to then go into afghanistan, that that now threatens pakistan's soverei

because the security in afghanistan the stability of afghanistan is not only for afghanistan it took effect disability and security of the region including russia was so wonderful our product involved foreign policy in the fight against terrorism and extremism and stability of afghanistan in the region is a region of cooperation because the fight against terrorism and extremism is not only individual afghanistan it is a regional issue so if you cannot find a solution the additional solution for it will be in deep trouble because that will continue and take longer time is nato presence threatening your internal security in relations to your immediate neighbors we have. working from day one to assure assure our neighbors that the presence of need to a life force in afghanistan is for security and stability in afghanistan for the fight against terrorism and extremism is not directed against any other country. and so far you have kept it reassuring gordon it would be neat to have a regional competition as i mentioned to to defeat terrorism extremism kabul has very good relations with was

>> afghanistan service. i will ask president karzai a question and then president obama. >> american, afghanistan service? >> yes. >> good. >> thank you. one of your purposes of your trip here to gain at the support of u.s. government for reconciliation and integration of taliban in afghanistan, when you first initiated these strategy or plan, you were interested in talks with lower to middle level of taliban but you have increasingly shown interest in to bringing taliban leaders into the negotiations. while taliban made it very clear that the only way for them to talk to the afghan government is a complete withdrawal of foreign troops from afghanistan and the creation of a government in that country. are you sure that this is strategy, after all the support that you will gain from international community will be a successful one and will not be yet another failed strategy in afghanistan? and my question for president obama would be that, secretary clinton yesterday mentioned in a gathering that u.s. support

afghanistan? >> there's afghans in there, john, who have been named and who have been identified as to where they live. those people are in danger right now of being murdered and their families of being murdered. critics on this panel, i would think, and opponents of the afghan war. this man is a saboteur of american foreign policy and of the war effort and i think this is deeply damaging and the people that did this aught to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. i do believe this, john, there's no question this put a brand-new focus on the afghan war and the key thing about it is, is the revelation in detail of how the pakistani intelligence services are not only working with us, they are also working training and plotting with the afghan taliban to kill american soldiers so this created real problems between us and pakistan and i think it's brought a new focus on the debate. and frankly, it will be to the president's war effort. >> eleanor, do you agree with that? >> the purpose of these

watch frontline. >> frontline's "the dancing boys of afghanistan" is available on dvd. to order, visit shoppbs.org or call 1-800-play-pbs. captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org >> frontline is made possible by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. with major funding from the john d. and catherine t. macarthur foundation. committed to building a more just, verdant and peaceful world. additional funding is provided by the park foundation. and by the frontline journalism fund. >> you're watching pbs. >> coming in may. >> we reinvented the university. >> they'll give you a degree... >> it's a very profitable business. >> ...find you a loan... >> they're doing it at the expense of the federal taxpayer. >> ...but will they give you an education? >> they're there to make money. they're there for profit. >> martin smith investigates. >> do you have the credibility to be determining the future of colleges around the country? >> no, but i'm doing it. >> "college, inc." watch frontline. >> and now, exclusively on-line. in the days af

in afghanistan. did bin laden set that attack? if al qaeda's on the run, why do they seem on the attack? and finally, command and control. has barack obama been too much the candidate and not enough the executive? has he shown real control of the government bureaucracy? in fighting this war? i'm chris matthews. welcome to the show. elisabeth bumiller covers the pentagon for "the new york times." joe kleine is a time magazine columnist. andrea mitchell is chief foreign affairs correspondent at nbc news. and david ignatius is a "washington post" columnist. first up, president obama reminded the country this week that enemies of america are still very much a threat. >> we are at war. we are at war against al qaeda. a far-reaching network of violence and hatred that attacked us on 9-11, that killed nearly 3,000 innocent people, and that is plotting to strike us again. chris: today we examine that threat with these four reporters who cover national security. we'll look at how al qaeda threatens us abroad

russia brings together afghanistan. to discuss how to tackle drug traffickers and terrorism in central asia the afghan war seems the major cause of instability. clashes are held every day despite the time of year and weather conditions right now it's extremely hot here but as you can see the troops are fully dressed in their uniforms still have to get used to it since this is what they'll have to wear on the job. takes you to the front line of the anti drugs border guards are put through tough training for the mission ahead. a human rights group says the scandal involving an ex israeli all the officer posting pictures of a cell posing with the palestinian detainees is just the tip of the iceberg. investigators say a blast in southern russia the engine could have been the work of the al qaeda linked militant behind munches moscow metro bombings police in the capital on high alert. i started to look at american history and politics and realized that my whole life i would like to. ideals hundreds of u.s. nationals feel the

because the security in afghanistan the stability of afghanistan is not only for afghanistan it took effect to stability and security of the region including russia was so wonderful our product involved foreign policy in the fight against terrorism and extremism and stability of afghanistan in the region is a region of cooperation because the fight against terrorism and extremism is not only individual afghanistan it is a regional issue so if you cannot find a solution the additional solution for it will be in deep trouble because that will continue and take longer time is nato presence threatening your internal security in relations to your immediate neighbors we have been working since day one to assure assure our neighbors that the presence of need to. allied force in afghanistan is for security and stability in afghanistan for the fight against terrorism and extremism is not directed against any other country and so far you have kept it reassuring gordon it would be neat to have your regional cooperation as i mentioned to to defeat terrorism extremism the couple has very good rel

we see the same in afghanistan. and we are checking the situation daily to look at the enemies operations and how the terrain and the weather and the environmental conditions as well as the enemy actions are affecting our soldiers in afghanistan, and we are trying to anticipate that and pass back the necessary changes to our army so that they can improve our equipment. one good example is when we first started sending mraps into afghanistan -- and some of you may know there are probably over 30 different variants of the mrap, but when we first started sending mraps over the largest ones that were most effective in iraq because of the way the enemy was attacking, or very cumbersome on the rough terrain and the terrible roads and afghanistan. they were too top heavy and we were breaking axes. as we look for an alternative and as you recall from this year, m-atv, b mrap maudine-protected vehicle was lighter weight, or satchel, has independent suspension and a number of improvements from the standard mrap that we were u

-- could the afghanistan war hurt obama? >> it depends on whether he succeeds or fails. if he sees us through and succeeds it'll be a benefit. if he loses it won't. >> it hasn't hurt him yet. he's now got the general who is the last best hope to make it work. if that doesn't work and petraeus sucks us in further, i think it has the potential of overwhelming this presidency. i would give it an 8. >> this wasn't mcchrystal's special area. he knew it even more than petraeus. petraeus has to get up to speed on afghanistan. >> no, he doesn't. >> petraeus was mcchrystal's boss. >> but it was implemented. >> but petraeus is mcchrystal's boss and he's keeping in mind the whole region. he's looking at pakistan and iran. so i think he has a better perspective of looking at the big picture, which may -- >> hold on, monica, we're going to you in a minute. >> look, a million things could happen. if you ask me for a number, i would say five. >> when's that number? >> if's five, i'm splitting the baby. >> that is it, a calculation of what?

because the security in afghanistan the stability of afghanistan is not only for afghanistan it took effect disability and security up to region including russia so wonderful our product involved foreign policy in the fight against terrorism and extremism and stability of afghanistan in the region is a region of cooperation because the fight against terrorism and extremism is not only individual afghanistan it is a regional issue so if you cannot find a solution the additional solution for it will be in deep trouble because that will continue and take longer time is nato presence threatening your internal security in relations to your immediate neighbors we have. working from day one to sure sure our neighbors the presence of new to allied forces in afghanistan is for security and stability in afghanistan for the fight against terrorism and extremism is not directed against any other country and so far you have kept out reassuring gordon it would be neat to have a regional cooperation as i mentioned to to defeat terrorism extremism kabul has very good relations with washington and wi

afghanistan. i hope he will talk about that as well. he is one of the most articulate national-security experts in the senate and has been outspoken in support of their troops, their mission, and the importance of understanding what is at stake in the war on terror. he condemned the new found process of setting arbitrary deadlines for troop drawdowns and said it would be a mistake to leave iraq with about maintaining a military presence. earlier this year, if he passed the terrorist retention review act which seeks to resolve some of the habeas issues. to talk about that bill, afghanistan, and anything else he would like to talk about, let me welcome senator lindsey graham. [applause] >> without food, i would have been worried. if you came here to figure out how al green paid his filing fee in south carolina or whether or not it is a good idea to dabble in witchcraft, whether obama was born in america, or whether the dream act will help senator harry reid in the upcoming election, you have come to

afford to leave afghanistan? the american people, while there are economic problems, i totally understand it. the taxpayers' generosity is not just to help the country like afghanistan. your lifestyle is at stake if the world becomes more and save. europeans and americans will not enjoy their life style. look at how you travel today. compared to 15 years ago. how much time do you spend at the airports? how many pairs of shoes are tested so it will not -- even now, you have to take them off. you can use your imagination and extend this and project it. if the world becomes further destabilize. do you think this kind of lifestyle will be sustainable? i doot think so. >> do we have anymore questions? up front first. >> icould you comment on two items. education and health. what international groups are involved in helping? what is the status of education of girls? >> as the father of four daughters, i like that question. >> education, i am sure that you have some sort of time with india. you know when india made the