May 4th, 2011
11:13 AM ET

The future of the war in Afghanistan

CNN's Kiran Chetry talks to a former CIA analyst and a legal policy analyst about the future of the war in Afghanistan.

Post by:
Filed under: Decision: Afghanistan
soundoff (13 Responses)
  1. wilsh

    @andrew lubin
    Not true. The mission, as first stated by Mr. Bush II in Oct. 2001, was to fight terrorism. We've just proven that we don't need 100,000 troops to kill terrorists when our special ops. killed O.B.L..Now the government is scrambling to figure out what our new mission can be called. I'm sure they can conjure up a dozen reasons to stay there.

    May 11, 2011 at 1:02 pm | Report abuse |
  2. wilsh

    No amount of lives, injuries or money can make that part of the world any different. What if the U.S. were invaded and occupied by China? Would they ever change the minds of Americans and convert us all to communism? The majority of us would always continue to have the minds for democracy. We can't change the minds of the people in Aghanistan by occupying their land. We need to BRING OUR TROOPS HOME. It is not the responsibility of the U.S. to police the world. If it was, we'd need troops in dozens of countries.

    May 11, 2011 at 12:54 pm | Report abuse |

    The future of war in Afghanistan is clearly visible in the past ten years of occupation. Osama was never a force in Afghan insurgent Taliban forces but was a liability, connecting an indigenous movement with International terrorism which has not only caused them isolation but has also put them in war against the whole world. There is no doubt that USA has occupied Afghanistan by force therefore Afghans have legitimate right under UN charter to resist this occupation and this resistance is not confined to Taliban but even those on Americans payroll in present setup like Afghan pilot Ahmad Gul recently killed 10 Americans single handedly at Kabul Airport. More such examples can be quoted and this trend is constantly growing with the passage of time. Osama's death will now finish US justification for further stay in Afghanistan and in case of delay Afghan insurgency will get moral support which may finally lead to US isolation in the world and finally burial in Afghan soil as had been the fate of other such aggressors in the past. So it is indeed great opportunity for Americans to learn from their mistakes and change for the better. These are the moments wherein fate of the world is decided.

    May 7, 2011 at 12:06 pm | Report abuse |
  4. salerno

    Karzai was put in power by the USA as the Taliban killed some of their relatives. Karzai claimed that AQ was not an Afghan reality and reported to the USA the protest of the Afghan people against civilians killing.

    May 6, 2011 at 2:17 pm | Report abuse |
  5. pamiri

    we know Pakistanis how and what they are, they just know money, they do not have believe on human being and trust on positive ways, they just want to get the control of Afghanistan by ISI through supporting of their slaves here in Afghanistan which one of them is Karzai, we should not trust on Karzai too if we are committed to remove Alqaeda and Taliban, Karzai is playing game against the international forces and he is trying to confront people against international forces in Afghanistan by his statements under the agenda of Pakistan.

    We know better that what Karzai does , and running whose agenda, People are well aware of who does what, who is supporting people and who is destroying the country, so why people are happy on killing of Osama, except those people who thinks like Karzai,

    From Kabul

    May 6, 2011 at 11:10 am | Report abuse |
  6. Riza Afghan

    USA should cut all AID and kick all terrorists from Afghanistan (seems no terrorist left in Afghanistan anymore, all are living in Pakistan for the past 7 years now ) then Pakistan will not have any $ and that's the end of Terrorists.

    Terrorists are only running for $, if no $ from USA and no $ from Afghan Drug then they are dead 😀



    May 5, 2011 at 2:33 pm | Report abuse |
  7. Napoli

    I'm relieved your capacity to crash needs no refining. If you plan to crash for maximum effect, however, you may want further instruction. Not to mention, how to get the plane to begin with. Fortunately, those training camps are closed now.

    May 5, 2011 at 8:19 am | Report abuse |
    • salerno

      No attacker were trained in Afghanistan. There was a travel of some of them in 1999 to Afghanistan from Germany to see Bin Laden , simply because he was there, but they were NOT TRAINED IN ANY CAMP in AFGHANISTAN.

      May 5, 2011 at 10:01 am | Report abuse |
  8. salerno

    Lisa curtis is telling stupidities. For Taliban the death of Bin Laden is irrelevant in order to stop the fight.
    Also her blaming Afghanistan for 9/11 is dead wrong. The attackers were not rained in Afghanistan, but in the US flying schools. So Obama should invade the USA and destroying those training camps. No attackers came from Afghanistan.
    Osama was in Afghanistan for a while, but he was in Sudan and in Pakistan for many years too.
    Finally Bush invaded Afghanistan because Mullah Omar did not consign OBL without conditions. Now OBL is dead.
    Continuing the war will create more terrorists. Ethnic cleansing of all Talibans is immoral and impossible. Many terrorists
    will be ready to act against the americans all around the world.

    May 4, 2011 at 1:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • Napoli

      Many "attackers" were trained in Afghanistan. They learned to fly planes (and not land) in the US. They learned to crash in Afghanistan. They learned evasion and combat tactics in Afghanistan in training camps that were for that purpose. The purpose of US "training camps" was to fly and land planes peacefully. The un-peaceful purpose of their mission was learned where? Afghanistan. Going into Afghanistan was for the right reasons. What to do now and for the future can and should be openly discussed.

      Pakistan is a great issue. Time and again we see the Pakistanis play both ends against the middle. On the one hand they collect billions in aid, and it might be argued, they need that aid. On the other, they build nuclear weapons. So it would seem, they do not need that aid and should spend (nuclear) funds elsewhere, where aid is needed. A Wishy washy ally to say the least. The US calls the Pakistanis a good and trusted ally. Perhaps the payments don't buy everything.

      May 4, 2011 at 8:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • salerno

      Napoli – you have under average intellectual faculties.
      I can assure you that if I learn to fly a jet, I do not need to learn how to crash it !!!!!!!
      Additionally yhe 9/11 attackers need not to learn any evasion tactics as they were suicide bombers !!!!
      They did not learn anything in Afghanistan, the attack was planned in Germany and they entered in US from Germany.
      Afghanistan was just a shelter for OBL and some other AQ members.

      May 5, 2011 at 1:28 am | Report abuse |
  9. andrew lubin

    Lisa Curtis, the CIA analyst, is correct; we can't leave now. While killing Osama is a good move (and long overdue!!), the mission was ALWAYS to build a rudmentary-acceptable form of goverment – and that's not yet been done.

    A shame to quite – again – before we complete this very do-able task, and Sen Lugar knows it.

    May 4, 2011 at 11:24 am | Report abuse |
    • Dan from Detroit, MI

      Don't worry,the right-wing thugs in Washington will in one way or another find some flimsy excuse to keep us there.

      May 4, 2011 at 1:50 pm | Report abuse |