On Tuesday’s CBS "Early Show," co-host Harry Smith talked to foreign correspondent Lara Logan about the situation in Afghanistan and she declared: "So seven years later we have more troops in the country than we have ever had. And yet no one is admitting the fact that we are facing strategic defeat in a country that wanted us there. Unlike Iraq, they actually wanted us there."
Smith introduced the segment by proclaiming: "U.S. officials say attempts to root out Al Qaeda and the Taliban are failing. And for the second straight month in June, militants killed more U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan than in Iraq."
During the segment, Smith displayed his foreign policy credentials in reference to the Afghanistan-Pakistan border: "I've been reading lightly about these tribal areas. I was there about 20 years ago. I described it to a friend of mine, it's like the Star Wars bar. You can't trust anyone there. You don't know who's loyal to who." So Afghans and Pakistanis are like strange-looking aliens?
Later, Smith asked Logan: "Are there enough U.S. troops, are there enough NATO troops to fight this fight?" After Logan replied: "No, there aren't enough of either troops," Smith followed up by asking: "Now here's the other question. There may not be enough troops. Is there anything close to a coherent strategy to fight both of these elements?" To that question, Logan remarked: "No. And there hasn't been for some time."
Here is the full transcript of the segment:
7:10AM SEGMENT:
HARRY SMITH: There is breaking news overnight in Afghanistan. U.S.-led forces say they scored a big hit against militants late Monday, killing more than 30 near the border with Pakistan. Despite this, U.S. officials say attempts to root out Al Qaeda and the Taliban are failing. And for the second straight month in June, militants killed more U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan than in Iraq. Joining us is CBS News chief foreign affairs correspondent Lara Logan. Good morning, good to have you with us. What is the biggest problem U.S. and NATO forces face over there in Afghanistan, in particular in trying to root out these Al Qaeda forces and Taliban?
LARA LOGAN: That their enemy is safely located across the border inside Pakistan and they cannot go there. That they have to stand there, inside Afghanistan, watch them disappear to safety. They can't get at their supply lines, their command and control centers, their financing, their weapons, their training. They have regrouped inside Pakistan and we can do absolutely nothing about it because we can't cross that border.
SMITH: Right and I've been reading lightly about these tribal areas. I was there about 20 years ago. I described it to a friend of mine, it's like the Star Wars bar. You can't trust anyone there. You don't know who's loyal to who. And is that not an area where a lot of the Al Qaeda have reformed and are basically are running to reform in a way, maybe even stronger than they were five or six years ago?
LOGAN: Well, they've managed to do in that area, which is just across the border, they've managed to do exactly what they did in Afghanistan before, which is to set up their base. Al Qaeda actually literally means 'the base.' And from there, they can plan attacks, they can run attacks. And most experts believe that the next terrorist attack, the next 9/11 on the United States is being planned.
SMITH: Right.
LOGAN: And set up in that area right now.
SMITH: Right there, right now. Oh, my gosh. Are there enough U.S. troops, are there enough NATO troops to fight this fight?
LOGAN: No, there aren't enough of either troops. What's interesting is there are right now between 32,000 and 33,000 American soldiers and Marines in Afghanistan. The highest number since the war in Afghanistan began. So seven years later we have more troops in the country than we have ever had. And yet no one is admitting the fact that we are facing strategic defeat in a country that wanted us there. Unlike Iraq, they actually wanted us there.
SMITH: Now here's the other question. There may not be enough troops. Is there anything close to a coherent strategy to fight both of these elements?
LOGAN: No. And there hasn't been for some time. We've had sort of forays across the border with special operations forces, the Pakistanis didn't want that. We farmed out the hunt for Bin Laden, we basically said to the Pakistanis 'okay, you can do it then, if you don't want us there.' The-
SMITH: And they end up telegraphing the attacks as they're about to come.
LOGAN: Harry, I've been on that border with U.S. patrols where the Pakistani forces will put up a white flag or signal with lights to let all the militants in the area know that you're there. I've seen them in attacks firing -- providing covering fire for militants going over that border. And this is what U.S. soldiers have been putting up with for seven years.
SMITH: Lara Logan, thanks very much for being with us this morning. Do appreciate it.
—Kyle Drennen is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Guy 1: We shouldn't be in
July 1, 2008 - 12:24 ET by FoolicanGuy 1: We shouldn't be in Iraq. We're losing in Iraq.
Guy 2: Actually, violence is down, and the Iraqi military is supporting itself quite handily.
Guy 1: Well, while we're in Iraq, our troops are being slaughtered in Afghanistan. We shouldn't be in Iraq.
Guy 2: I thought we were losing in Iraq.
Guy 1: We're losing in Iraq and Afghanistan! Our military is in total chaos! We need change! Vote Barack Obama!
Guy 2: O-kay...
We lost in Iraq
July 1, 2008 - 16:09 ET by 10ksnookerWhy shouldn't we lose in Afghanistan.
Vote for the Communist, he will fix everything that ailes you, by taking it all away.
Spin alert!
July 1, 2008 - 12:38 ET by Ron_servative"And for the second straight month in June, militants killed more U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan than in Iraq."
...because U.S. casualties were down in Iraq, not because there were more in Afghanistan.
btw, how many months are in June? Apparently at least 2. ;^)
Lord only knows
July 1, 2008 - 12:42 ET by jefflebowskihow bad I want to give that half a sissy Harry Smith a slap!
I know he is intellectually dishonest because NOBODY can be that stupid! Does anyone besides NB watch these shows?
Harry, if you're reading this...anytime..anywhere...bring your lunch!
Jeff Lebowski
www.angrywhitedude.c...
"And yet no one is
July 1, 2008 - 14:21 ET by kg"And yet no one is admitting the fact that we are facing strategic defeat in a country that wanted us there."
Could that be because we are not facing a strategic defeat?
"Forget change, I want improvement!"
False statistics alert....
July 1, 2008 - 12:47 ET by c5thenThe only reason that Afghanistan has "passed" Iraq in number of troops killed over the last {fill in time period here} is because Iraq has gotten SO MUCH BETTER SINCE THE SURGE.
It's time to SURGE in Afghanistan.
Note to twit-boy Logan: Afghanistan DID NOT want "us" there until we beat the Taliban and allowed Afghanistan to set up it's own democratically elected government. THAT government unequivocally wants us there now and in the future until they can fight and defeat the taliban elements crossing over from Pakistan.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
Cheerleaders for America's
July 1, 2008 - 12:51 ET by mattmCheerleaders for America's enemies....nice.
How...
July 1, 2008 - 13:02 ET by Long Island PeteHow would Lara know this? She was too busy banging anything that moved.
How crude
July 1, 2008 - 13:08 ET by IgnatzJFahrquar... and you beat me to the punch. Pretty much what I was going to post.
"All generalizations are false, including this one.” Mark Twain
Give credit where credit is due!
July 1, 2008 - 13:26 ET by BayshoremanLara should be commended for bringing a new meaning and purpose to in-bedded reporters. There is no doubt that since her days as a swimsuit model, she has developed special "talents" to coax newsworthy information from friends and foe alike regardless of marital status. Watch your back Baba Wawa!!!!
Lara Logan
July 1, 2008 - 13:36 ET by UnsaneIn-bedded reporter my foot. She was too busy doing the horizontal hokey-pokey with any guy she could find, so it seems, to get out in the field beyond Baghdad.
I repeat: during my time in Iraq, I saw ONE reporter there. ONE. It wasn't Lara Logan, and that reporter (Martha Raddatz) was not there to report on the VP pinning on Bronze Stars on some deserving soldiers.
(But I suspect you are onto something. Maybe her future lies on The View.) :-)
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
They have to counter
July 1, 2008 - 13:44 ET by IgnatzJFahrquarThey have to counter Elizabeth H. somehow. Some real liberal "beauties" there on "The Spew".
"All generalizations are false, including this one.” Mark Twain
I've been told by people
July 1, 2008 - 13:46 ET by celatorI've been told by people who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan that almost no US reporters go out into the field with the troops--one or two at a time perhaps. They hang out in the Green Zone or some really safe place, sleep late, get drunk, whine and crab about how tough it is for them. Your comments verify that. They take their cue from the traitor Seymour Hersch who did the very same thing in 'Nam.
Three requests (you'll love the last one)
July 1, 2008 - 14:48 ET by UnsaneI had simple requests when I returned home:
1) I wanted good, high quality Mexican and Italian grub. I missed that. I got it. Life is good!
2) No one was to slam doors around me for any reason, at least for several weeks.
3) If they cherished their HDTV, I was not to be present in the room for my parents' viewing of whatever national TV news program they were watching (yes, they still do that, and ABC seems to still be the favorite). Why? Because I would not tolerate ANY talk on Iraq/Afghanistan (and still won't) on the news after my deployment, for I learned while there the media didn't know what the hell they were talking about as they never ventured beyond the Green Zone.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Thank you for your service,
July 1, 2008 - 16:30 ET by DEVILDOCMOMmy son had a couple of, well, not requests when he came home from Iraq, but things he does not like to do...walk down dirt roads, see an AK 47 (he has no problem with American made rifles and handguns), and be around smoke or fumes of any kind.
We only watch FOX, well, my husband likes Lou Dobbs so we do see him on cnn. My son would certainly agree with you on your last comment.
PS head to Tucson for great Mexican food.
Regarding Tucson
July 1, 2008 - 23:51 ET by UnsaneTucson, huh? Is that a long drive from Phoenix? I am currently scheming to get out there to visit the state capitol (I want to hit all 50 and so far I have 10, including the two hardest ones).
Here's a hat tip to your son and believe me, I understand his not wanting to walk down dirt roads all too well!!! (And the smoke and fumes thing.)
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
"2) No one was to slam
July 1, 2008 - 22:14 ET by celator"2) No one was to slam doors around me for any reason, at least for several weeks."
Yep. I know exactly what you mean in both 2 and 3. Welcome back, and thanks!
Be fair now
July 1, 2008 - 13:38 ET by Captain KirockLara does know the intimate details of the ceilings in several hotel rooms in Baghdad. That more than qualifies her as CBS' expert on Afghanistan.
Anyone with intelligence please stand up ...
July 1, 2008 - 13:04 ET by Meandering... Not so fast Harry Smith. I remember a blog yesterday pondering what the MSM will do with the information that Iraq casualties are down for the 2nd month in a row. Well, now we know. Guess what, our soldiers are doing their job and doing it well. Smith needs to get a job he's actually qualified for ... flipping burgers. Wait, that might be too intellectually challenging for him.
Fairness doctrine at CBS?
July 1, 2008 - 13:27 ET by krendlerSo, as the msm and the Dems inform us, the American people aren't interested in Iraq any more and it won't be a big campaign issue. Things are simply going too well there.
However, THERE's Afghanistan. Let's see how negatively they can portray that (along with the economy).
If the liberals want it so bad, I'd love to see the fairness doctrine shoved down the throat of people like Harry Smith and CBS. Have maybe Laura Ingraham provide the counter-point, ridiculing Smith and Logan after they've finished their idiotic and horrendously biased "expert" analysis of our "incoherent" military strategy in Afgahnistan.
I see that they're being
July 1, 2008 - 13:27 ET by TheCitizenI see that they're being particulary negative about the situation in Afghanistan, and these people are obviously biased (based on previous experiences), but I'm not seeing the "busted" part of this article. Maybe I'm missing something. I assume they're lying, or at least exaggerating, but what's the truth of the matter?
Busted
July 1, 2008 - 14:08 ET by MeanderingI don't think they are lying or exaggerating (well probably exaggerating). The truth is the death toll in Afghan is higher for the past 2 months than in Iraq. The problem is the spin, there's always a spin. The number of deaths or casualties there hasn't grown but because the same toll is down so much in Iraq (meaning less violence, meaning we are winning, meaning the surge and other such measures not supported by the liberals that run this "news" program were wrong) they shift their focus from a failing Iraq to a "failing Afghan" when nothing is failing at all. Does this help?
Yeah it does. However,
July 1, 2008 - 15:42 ET by TheCitizenYeah it does. However, didn't the Pentagon recently release a memo saying that the Taliban had regrouped and was operating out of Northern Pakistan? I heard that the situation there is getting worse, which is one of the reasons they have Petraeus talking to Pakistani military officials.
Couldn't tell you
July 1, 2008 - 16:25 ET by MeanderingI don't know, but my opinion is send more troops, find Bin Laden and crush the taliban once and for all. The libs won't allow that though since terrorists now have the same rights as we do.
The Star Wars Bar?
July 1, 2008 - 13:28 ET by YahooWatcherNo, Harry, that's over on 1st and 45th, better known as the UN.
9/27/'96 - Afghan rebels seize capital, hang former president
July 1, 2008 - 13:57 ET by Gary HallSept 27, 1996 - Afghan rebels seize capital, hang former president
There's a bit of parity here amongst administrations. Actually, and not well represented in "Charlie Wilson's War," both Carter (that Carter) and Reagan saw the desperate need and our role in preventing the Soviet Imperialists from conquering Afghanistan.
Best I can recall, the US was pretty much, as usual, going it alone.
Then there was a bit of a void - from the 1988 defeat of and the withdrawl of the USSR from Afghanistan to 2001- from the world, the UN, and the US and to the best of my knowledge, little attention was paid to the disaster left behind, and then:
Not necessarily a wonderful period of time in Afghanistan, either.
Back to 1996.
Horrific human atrocities, crimes against women, and complete loss of basic human rights are at stake. What was going on in the White House? I mean besides ignoring the massive civil war and genocide in the DR Congo, the Ivory Coast, Sierra Leone, the lack of a national energy policy, the sad shape of New Orleans before the storms, and the global HIV/Aids pandemic?
OK, so we spent one evening bombing Bin Laden's camp in 1998. Taliban didn't budge. Missed Bin Laden.
I'm thinking of the vast powerful movements of the left with the MSM serving as cheerleaders here. I'm thinking of the "Save Darfur" movement - the "End Apartheid" movement.
The left wakes up acts like they care about the plight of the 3rd world, when we have a Republican president. Suddenly they become aroused and angry.
(;~/
Nice recap!
July 1, 2008 - 14:21 ET by MeanderingG.H. thanks for the recap. We all know what Clinton was doing in the Oval office while these horrible things were happening. Yep, its only when there is a Republican in the white house when they rise up to help the 3rd world countries. Its funny though that America can only help the countries that the liberals approve of.
Logan
July 1, 2008 - 14:33 ET by jaywlObomba should consider Logan for SecDef or State. She is just so damned smart. Much smarter than the combined wisdom of our DoD and NATO and ...well, gee, just about the whole universe.
???
July 1, 2008 - 14:46 ET by deerjerkydaveAccording to the liberal media, watching Star Wars makes you credentialed on foreign affairs.
And Ms. Logan? She's an ex-beauty contestant. We know what she wants: WORLD PEACE. Now that's all anybody needs to be credentialed on foreign affairs!
Seriously, this is why I don't watch the MSM anymore. Give me the facts and I can form my own better opinion than a bunch of news readers.
Yep world peace and she
July 1, 2008 - 15:44 ET by Dan The Man 2Yep world peace and she knows where The Iraq is.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
After Logan replied: "No,
July 1, 2008 - 15:18 ET by TEAfter Logan replied: "No, there aren't enough of either troops," Smith followed up by asking: "Now here's the other question. There may not be enough troops. Is there anything close to a coherent strategy to fight both of these elements?" To that question, Logan remarked: "No. And there hasn't been for some time."
What the hell would Sergeant Major Lara Logan know about the number of military personnel needed to achieve any objective? What the hell would Sergeant Major Lara Logan know about a "coherent strategy"? It's frightening, but we have plenty of fools in the U.S. (see the Huffington Post) who actually "think" that Sergeant Major Lara Logan knows something about the U.S. military and warfare.
sad commentary
July 1, 2008 - 15:36 ET by gordonLaura Logan Sex Scandal in Baghdad. Former swimsuit model and CBS News correspondent Laura Logan, aka Lara Logan, has been caught in a sex scandal. According to reports, the said scandal started when she was covering the Iraq war. In fact, some news portal said that Laura Logan, “spent her days covering the heat of the Iraq war - but that was nothing compared to the heat of her nights.”
Moreover, The “60 Minutes” reporter and former swimsuit model apparently courted two beaus while she was in Baghdad, and has been labeled a home wrecker for allegedly destroying the marriage of a civilian contractor there, sources said.
Passions got so hot in the combat zone that one of her lovers, Joe Burkett, brawled in a Baghdad “safe house” with her other paramour, CNN war reporter Michael Ware, a source said. The wife of Burkett, a US Embassy worker, claims the sultry 37-year-old correspondent seduced him while bullets flew overhead.”
And for that “safe house brawl”? It never happened according to Laura. But of course on top of that rumored Laura Logan sex scandal she’s now a chief foreign-affairs correspondent.
Kinda reminds me of two
July 1, 2008 - 15:48 ET by marvlKinda reminds me of two preschoolers discussing quantum mechanics. Yeah right, like these two MSM bozos know anything about the war in Afghanistan.
marvl... ..or anything
July 1, 2008 - 15:57 ET by bigtimermarvl...
..or anything else...with the exception of looking into a camera...
Seems a lot of enemies within and without have that down to a tee.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Wilson
OK
July 1, 2008 - 16:59 ET byU.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in a press briefing that he
had "real concern" that Pakistan was contributing to Afghanistan's
instability by failing to prevent militants from crossing into
Afghanistan to carry out attacks on coalition forces. Cross-border
attacks on U.S. troops in eastern Afghanistan have gone up 40% over the
past several months. Gates attributes the increase to Pakistani
cease-fire accords with Islamist militants in which the country's
coalition government agreed to pull the military out of the militants'
areas in exchange for a promise not to attack government institutions.
The deals meant that "the pressure was taken off" the militants, who
are now "free to be able to cross the border and create problems for
us," Gates said. http://www.time.com/...
the Pentagon is predicting Taliban attacks and bombings will continue
to increase because the Taliban has “coalesced into a resilient
insurgency.”
and the United Nations has revealed the number of civilians killed in
Afghanistan has soared by 60 percent in the first half of the year
But really, this post is rather lame, because I don't really understand what the point of it is. You don't dispute anything that is said and come to no real conclusions of any sort. Unless your point was to out Smith as a Star Wars fan, or create an easy joke for your readers about Logan sleeping around (but in all disclosure, I"m looking forward to a future post where I can make the same jokes with Dr. Laura Schlessinger). Kudos.
I think we can all agree things are not going great over there currently, and it is something that is newsworthy and should be reported.
You don't dispute anything that is said
July 2, 2008 - 13:40 ET by wizardjrEither you didn't read the responses here or you are ignoring them.
There is no strategic defeat. The Taliban come out of hiding and we kill them. Unfortunately, some civilians and soldiers get killed too. Afghanistan has never been a country before. They are moving from tribes counting coup to an actual nation. In the mean time cockroaches keep coming out from under the sink. So, we kill them. The transition from tribes occupying a general area to a nation of Afghanis is a major strategic victory.
We need to start doing a "Laos" on the Pakis. We seem to fall for this BS where the bad guys move over somebody's border so we can't go after them again, and again. Korea and Viet Nam come to mind. That's a failure of will, not a strategic defeat.
maybe a new saudi arabia?
July 1, 2008 - 17:08 ET by sajc05I guess we can all hope that some day either Iraq or Afghanistan get a US military protected government whose citizens are bred to kill jews and americans like in saudia arabia, our other "great" ally in the region and whose citizens were the number one killer in 9/11. just like that al queda thug saddam... oh wait
Pitifully ignorant
July 1, 2008 - 23:56 ET by UnsaneYou really need to understand what the term realpolitik means.
Once again you show that you understand next to nothing of foreign policy. Saudi Arabia's problem is that they are scared of everybody, so they pay off everybody (h/t to Dunnigan and Bay).
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Wait a minute..didn't they
July 1, 2008 - 17:52 ET by BigBWait a minute..didn't they used to have a word for people like this?.....Hmmmmm...
OH! I got it: Whore...
Now, this might sting just a little bit.....
Ms. Logan
July 2, 2008 - 01:11 ET by Sua Sponte 75Isn't this the same babe who they attributed an interview with a taliban leader that never occured? In fact she wasn't even in the country. I find it laughable how they believe they can comment on military operations yet can't tell the difference between and AK47 and a T72.
"You're either part of the solution or part of the problem"
Hot, but what else???
July 2, 2008 - 03:40 ET by UnsaneLara Logan: she's hot, and...well, that's pretty much it.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.