For the second night, CBS devoted time in its “Afghanistan: The Road Ahead” series -- which consumed the entirety of Tuesday's CBS Evening News -- to stressing how the decision to go into Iraq undermined success in Afghanistan. Lara Logan, CBS's chief foreign correspondent, rued “the U.S. allowed Osama bin Laden to escape from the Tora Bora mountains” and then, in endorsing the view she credited to “many,” she contended:
What many here see as the gravest error of all: Afghans were wary as the U.S. turned its attention to invading Iraq. And they were right. Everything from reconstruction and aid to the fight itself suffered as the U.S. shifted its resources and its focus away from Afghanistan and the commitment it had made to the Afghan people. Not surprisingly, Afghan support for the war began to fade.
Unaddressed: President Barack Obama is wavering on that commitment since he's now resisting General Stanley McChrystal's recommendation for a big troop increase to protect the Afghan population from the Taliban while Vice President Joe Biden is advocating an air strike-centered approach which will leave Afghan citizens in danger.
The Monday night NewsBusters item, “Couric Relies on Albright to Blame Obama's Afghanistan Conundrum on Bush,” recounted:
“With Hamid Karzai in place as the interim leader of Afghanistan, the drum beat of war moved west to Iraq,” Couric recalled in using the loaded “drum beat of war” language, leading into [former Secretary of State Madeleine] Albright's scolding of former President Bush: “The problem was that he took his eye off the ball and linked two things that didn't go together, which is al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden and so things got much worse.” Couric pounded home the point: “By October of 2006, there were 148,000 U.S. troops in Iraq and just 21,000 in Afghanistan.”
CBSNews.com online version of Logan's story.
From the Tuesday, October 6 CBS Evening News:
LARA LOGAN: The fall of Kabul in 2001 was greeted with jubilation. The momentum then with the U.S. But reluctant to commit its own troops, the U.S. allowed Osama bin Laden to escape from the Tota Bora mountains. Then, what many here see as the gravest error of all: Afghans were wary as the U.S. turned its attention to invading Iraq. And they were right. Everything from reconstruction and aid to the fight itself suffered as the U.S. shifted its resources and its focus away from Afghanistan and the commitment it had made to the Afghan people. Not surprisingly, Afghan support for the war began to fade.
LARA LOGAN TO ABDULLAH ABDULLAH: What was lost in Afghanistan with the U.S. focusing on Iraq?
ABDULLAH ABDULLAH, AFGHAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The greatest opportunity, the best opportunity for a stabilization of Afghanistan.
LOGAN: That lost opportunity has led the U.S. into a fight that would have been unimaginable eight years ago when the Taliban collapsed in disarray. Back then, valleys like this in Northeastern Afghanistan were peaceful, the U.S. believing their enemy was defeated, put few military assets on the ground. Another grave mistake. Now even the most-remote mountains are killing grounds...
—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I guess the pool reporters
October 6, 2009 - 20:35 ET by fitzfongI guess the married pool reporters are more attractive in Afghanistan than in Iraq?
"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best
Same narrative they've been
October 7, 2009 - 03:42 ET by notonmywatchSame narrative they've been pushing for years.
Why don't they be honest and blame it on the B-word?
Dems be honest? Sorry, what was I thinking.
___________________________________________________________
Graphical conservative commentary - animations & pictures for posting on forums: http://ubama.org/chu...
What? Nothing about the
October 6, 2009 - 20:39 ET by RR GOPWhat? Nothing about the Gulf of Tonkin?
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 86% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.
That lost opportunity has
October 6, 2009 - 20:46 ET by Dan The Man 2That lost opportunity has led the U.S. into a fight that would have
been unimaginable eight years ago when the Taliban collapsed in
disarray. Back then, valleys like this in Northeastern Afghanistan were
peaceful, the U.S. believing their enemy was defeated, put few military
assets on the ground. Another grave mistake. Now even the most-remote
mountains are killing grounds.
These are most likely idiots of the first magnitude. No one thought the enemy was defeated and I believe the reports at the time understood they vanished into Pakistan. Have we not been bombing Pakistan on the occasion. These people dont know the first thing about tactics.
Back then, valleys like this in Northeastern Afghanistan were
peaceful The miltary always knew the situation was volatile. I dont know what should be done there to calm the situation and Im not sure that anything can calm it down completely. The big thing is the locals are going to have to do it.
Since Duh Vain One took over the body count has been higher.
Know how to keep a Troll in suspense? Ill tell ya in the morning.
You know, every once in
October 6, 2009 - 20:47 ET by BKeyserYou know, every once in awhile I get fired up about something, and pantywaist reporters railing about anything military usually does it.
First of all, we went into Afghanistan to take on the Taliban and Al Qaeda. After about three weeks, there weren't any left in country to speak of. So, missy, what prey-tell would your vast background in military strategy have you do? Well, thankfully serious military minds disregarded your Risk gaming experience, did not ask for your input, and instead decided to pursue the bad guys, which lead us to Iraq. You'll note mindless Logan, that Al Qaeda in Iraq became a pretty well-known entity. And, regardless of whether they were there on 9/11 or not, they went there in 2003 when we went after Saddam. One place they didn't go, however, was Manhattan- since they were busy fighting us in Iraq. A monumental point you dunderhead lefties refuse to acknowledge.
So, please stop reporting as if you have any sense of military strategy, planning, forethought, or understanding in any sense, because it's obvious that all you can do is offer partisan BDS.
Sorry for the rant.
Roach Motel
October 7, 2009 - 01:06 ET by wolfemanicLike cock roaches al qaeda ran into Iraq to kill Americans, it became for them like the roach motel, you check in but you don't check out. Ours was bad, but no one talks about the losses al qaida took in Iraq. We may never know, but I assure you their body count is massive. And I'm damn proud of every single American who made this possible.
Ah, but even then our losses
October 7, 2009 - 01:46 ET by zfAh, but even then our losses were small in nunber compared to other conflicts including Korea and Vietnam.
Ditto, you're right on the
October 7, 2009 - 07:56 ET by dscottDitto, you're right on the money, why would anyone pure a hundred thousand troops into a country where there was no more enemy to deal with? I guess the liberals wanted our military to be seen as an occupation force. What a wonderful military strategy, get the population to believe you're there to stay making Afghanistan the 51st state of the Union. Why else did Rumsfeld go with the minimum footprint strategy that ultimately didn't pan out when al Qaeda decided to make Iraq the central front in their War on the West. The Surge replaced the minimum footprint strategy since the circumstances changed.
Military strategy always changes in response to new conditions on the ground. One look at the casualty count demonstrates the reality of this between the two countries. We are faced with a determined enemy whose goal is world wide domination, their theater of operation is the entire world, our military's theater of operation is where ever the enemy is making trouble at any specific point in time. You see the disadvantage liberals? Of course not, politicing is far more important to liberals than the security of the country much less the lives of the troops.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
So transparent and
October 6, 2009 - 21:18 ET by JerrySo transparent and predictable...
Violence escalates under Obama. Obama fails to meet with commanders. Obama has no lucid policy. Obama ignores Generals plea for more troops. Obama neglects real duties to beg for Olympic bid. Gotta be time for another Bush sux report from the MSM (D).
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
Exactly, like Obamas
October 7, 2009 - 01:54 ET by zfExactly, like Obamas appeasement stance has nothing to do with the emboldement in our enemies we see everywhere.
And does this woman really believe it's impossible for the U.S. to fight effectively on two fronts at the same time? In the 40s she would have said "our fighting Japan in the Pacific is leading to a lost effort in Germany."
And I don't remember the violence in Afghanastain increasing while we were fighting the heaviest in Iraq. If anything, the violence occured while Iraq violence was ebbing and *more* resources were being sent to Afghan.
This is more than just
October 7, 2009 - 08:05 ET by dscottThis is more than just appeasement, this is Obama being more concerned with internal domestic politics than the security of the US. Obama foolishly believes the US could never be invaded or be bedeviled with terrorism that exists in Iraq or Afghanistan. He believes his greatest concern is what 21% of the population (libs) thinks of him as opposed to the security concerns of 79% of the population. Obama and his advisors are dangerously myopic to the end game of the terrorists, that is world wide domination. You would think after creating chaos in Somali, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia, etc. that they would realize they were dealing with a group of people who aren't interested in peace but bloodletting.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
Obama should just do what
October 6, 2009 - 21:43 ET by mattmObama should just do what he said we should do when he said Bush should have focused on Afghanistan and pull us out of Iraq and and move into Afghanistan.
It would be the wrong policy, but it would be the honest thing for him to do - which poses a problem for him...
Somebody hold ma beer...
October 6, 2009 - 22:00 ET by Six String SpiffOk Lara. A few things:
You are standing in a GREEN ZONE, are you not? There are things that need to be done to keep them that way, and it wasn't Obamas doing.
As for the stunningly ignorant claim that the US 'allowed' Osama to escape, you need to do some research. There is an individual who likes to cram National Archive documents down his pants. Sandy Burger I believe. You might want to have a talk with him.
"Lara Logan, CBS's chief
October 6, 2009 - 22:06 ET by rockyracoon"Lara Logan, CBS's chief foreign correspondent," that phrase, description, or whatever you call it cracks me up.
Facts are like kryptonite to the liberal.
Yep, it's like when the
October 6, 2009 - 22:20 ET by Six String SpiffYep, it's like when the Janitor refers to themselves as "Sanitary Engineer"..
Also, notice how all of the people who yak into a camera are "Chiefs" and "Lead" or "Director"
I work with a team of Engineers and Scientists developing Ion Mobility Spectrometry and Mass Spectrometry interfaces that help detect trace explosive chemicals. I don't even KNOW what my title is. Maybe that's because I have a real job, Lara.
Lara Logan got her job for reasons other than her qualifications
October 6, 2009 - 22:26 ET by R D HelmNormally, I would rail against such things but, well, in this case...
Oink.
:-^)
-Dave
Revisionist History
October 7, 2009 - 00:46 ET by Jeff in Miami BeachI am still trying to decide if this is revisionist history or a total lack of knowledge about Iraq. Let’s see if I remember correctly there was a vote on the invasion of Iraq and both the House and Senate said go to war! Funny how that is rarely mentioned, even Pelosi voted for war. The other thing this article does not mention is the foreign fighters that moved from Iraq to fight the Americans in Afghanistan. These are battle harden fighters that are no longer welcome in Iraq. Now is time for Obama either to fortify the troops or lose the war. Obama is getting good at losing, Olympics, healthcare, next stimulus package, closing GITMO, canceling the missile shield for Poland and the support of the millions of voters. I just hope he is willing to fight for the troops and not let them fight without a complete plan of action designed by someone who knows how to win a war.
Now that Obama is continuing to use Rendition (even though he thought it was wrong when he ran). He is trying to dismantle the CIA (even though everyone from Al Gore to Bill Clinton thought Saddam had WMDs). I personally would really like to know if the CIA has assets all over the Middle East and in North Korea. These nations along with the foreign fighters in Afghanistan are real enemies of the US.
If you think medical care is expensive now wait until it is free!
Military advice from a Blond Bimbo?
October 7, 2009 - 05:12 ET by Red JeepI don't think so, or Katie Couric. But...
Must be our military is not fighting with its full force and fury or the War on Terror in Afghanistan would have been over long before now. Afghanistan is not a Germany or Japan. Al Qaeda or the Taliban doesn't even have airplanes or tanks!
It took the US only 4 years to win WW2 with weaponry far less lethal than what they have now. Now this war in Afghanistan is 8 years plus?!?! Something’s wrong here and it has to be politics.
The real problem in Afghanistan is Pakistan.
October 7, 2009 - 06:59 ET by c5thenWithout the ability for the Pakistan military to control (sometimes even exist ) in the Waziristan area, there is effectively a border that is only recognized by the US and NATO. The taliban and al queda just stay in Pakistan and slip accross into Afghanistan to do what they want and then slip back.
The Pakistani Intelligence services are riddled with taliban and al queda sympathizers (if not out and out members) and so are completely untrustworthy.
If we really want to win in Afghanistan we need to completely divorce ourselves from Pakistan and treat them the same way we would treat Syria if that were the neighboring country. The border between Afghanistan and Pakistan needs to be shut, or as close to shut as it's possible to get.
Throw 'da bums out!!!
no incumbent re-elected, with very few exceptions!
www.loyaltoliberty.com
Her past
October 7, 2009 - 09:49 ET by zachlindWith Logan’s promiscuous past maybe CBS should introduce her to David Letterman.
Credibility problem!?!?!?!?!?
October 7, 2009 - 11:34 ET by jimrunnerWhy is this individual considered a correspondent???? This is the person who got pregnant from a man who was married to another woman while she was married to another man. Does anyone question her truthfulness?
She's an employee of CBS.
October 7, 2009 - 12:49 ET by fitzfongShe's an employee of CBS. What are the odds that she's visited the bachelor pad above the Ed Sullivan Theater?
"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best