Kautzman's AP GO PO Blog

CE Week #5: Video “Meet The Press Roundtable – Afghanistan” Oct. 4th

Create a free edublog to get your own comment avatar (and more!)

5 Comments Leave a comment.

1. on October 7, 2009 at 6:56 pm Kyle Hicks Said:
   

   A. What did you learn by watching this post?
   I, like most people, have not been following the war in Afghanistan as closely as I should. This video, I thought, gave a good, general explanation of the current situation in Afghanistan but focused more on how politicians are handling it.

   B. What do you think about this particular topic or issue?
   As stated above, my opinions are pretty novice, so with more or better information my opinions might change. Currently, my opinions are thus: I believe that we have been in Afghanistan long enough, and we need to end the conflict. It would be unwise to leave Afghanistan in its current situation, though. As Mike Murphy said, “We know the way that works in counter-insurgency…is to flood the place with American troops to bring stability.” Unfortunately, the Obama administration seems to want to please everybody by compromising and only sending some troops, but not as many as we need to insure stability. At a certain point, Obama needs to quit trying to please. It’s in the job description of “President” that he has to make unpopular choices. Obama needs to realize that we elected him to lead our country, and that requires doing what he thinks is right which is doing whatever it takes to win this “war worth fighting”.

   C. What more do you want to know about this topic?
   The video mostly focused on the politics in Washington D.C. surrounding the Afghanistan War, so I want to know what is happening militarily in Afghanistan?

2. on October 8, 2009 at 10:01 pm Jeremy Urann Said:
   

   What did I learn?

   I never knew that President Obama promised to close Guantanamo Bay during his campaign. That was news to me. Although, I derived that knowledge from the short SNL skit they showed on “Meet the Press”, not from the actual hosts. Alas, I gained a greater understanding of what a difficult political position the Obama Administration is in with regards to Afghanistan and our fighting there. If we completely withdraw our troops, for instance, we may be pleasing many here in the US of A but it goes against everything we’ve been fighting for. And if we intend to win we will most likely need to send more troops over, causing disruption at home, but eventually achieving our goal.

   What do I think?

   I think I don’t know. When it comes to Afghanistan, I really don’t know why we first initiated war, other than 9/11, which, to my understanding, served as the spark to the war on terrorism. I also think we need to stop striving to achieve victory in the generic sense because when you are fighting a war on ideals, there is no one winner. You can not always change the way a multitude of people or even a nation thinks. I think we need to stick it out. I think we need to finish the job and then make like peanut butter and jam.

   What do I want to know?

   What are some theories on why we first entered the war, other than 9/11? Any interesting insights would be appreciated.

3. on October 11, 2009 at 2:47 pm Drew Williams Said:
   

   Jeremy Urann:

   There are a lot of theories of why we have entered the war, but here are the main theories:
   1. For oil and other resources that we needed.
   2. U.S. policy to increase economic pressure on Iraq and it’s government.
   3. Bush wanted to protect his fathers name, because his father told America that he sent troops for defense, but he really didn’t.
   4. We went because of intelligence failures
   5. To get rid of Saddam and we are still there trying to contain and control them.

4. on October 11, 2009 at 2:54 pm Dillon Fischer Said:
   

   In response to Jeremy Urann:
   There really isn’t much to why we entered the war other than 9/11. “The stated aim of the invasion was to find Osama bin Laden and other high-ranking Al-Qaeda members and put them on trial, to destroy the whole organization of Al-Qaeda, and to remove the Taliban regime which supported and gave safe harbor to Al-Qaeda.” With such strong national anger over the September 11th attacks, the President had to take retaliatory action to please the majority of Americans (in addition to believing it was the right thing to do).

   The only other theory I’ve heard is a ridiculous conspiracy theory that we invaded Iraq for oil, and will take over both Afghanistan and soon Iran to build an oil pipeline from Iraq through Iran and Afghanistan into China. There it will be sold for massive profits to the growing Chinese industrial economy.

5. on October 11, 2009 at 6:30 pm Jeremy Urann Said:
   

   Kyle Hicks!
   Eh Kyle, I realize that Mr. Kautzman wasn’t totally done with us just copy and pasting articles, but…this isn’t really something I can rephrase because it is a conversation I found. I’m aware that it may include inaccuracies but it is from a pretty reliable source, KPBS. So, without further ado, the conversation:
   GLORIA PENNER (Host): Talking about kitchen table conversation, used to be about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan then as the economy took front and center, we talked less about those wars. And now Afghanistan is sneaking back into our thoughts and our conversation. On Capitol Hill, questions about our mission there are mounting. So, Tony, what exactly is our mission in Afghanistan?
   TONY PERRY (San Diego Bureau Chief, Los Angeles Times): Good question. It’s what the Obama-ites are currently evaluating and they’re developing metrics and they’re analyzing it to a faretheewell. At this moment, it appears to be get the Afghan security forces ready to roll and so we can take off the training wheels, stabilize the Karzai government, introduce the Karzai government in Kabul to the rest of the country, strike at the Al Qaeda enclaves near the Pakistan border, shore up the Pakistani intelligence services so they’re not getting in bed with Al Qaeda again. It’s a whole laundry list of things, none of them quite focused as nicely, I think, as the Secretary of Defense would like and the military would like.
   PENNER: Does that work against our staying in Afghanistan? I mean, we’re not – obviously, we’re not there to nation build.
   PERRY: No, we’re there to nation build.
   PENNER: We are. Okay.
   PERRY: Oh, yeah.
   PENNER: Get it on the table.
   PERRY: Yeah, let’s say it like it is, we’re trying to create a nation from a non-nation and we’re trying to stabilize a government that is shaky at best, corrupt at worst. It is a…
   TOM YORK (Editor, San Diego Business Journal): That’s a…
   PERRY: …daunting, daunting task.
   PENNER: Tom.
   YORK: The Karzai government is a puppet government of the United States. I – It has no popular support.
   PERRY: I’m not sure I’d go that far down the road but it certainly lives and breathes because of the U.S. military and the NATO forces. On the other hand, he may be the lesser of two lessers. Abdullah Abdullah, the fellow who was running against him, I don’t think is George Washington either. It’s a very difficult situation that we’re in. The brass that goes to congress and goes on the Lehrer NewsHour is pretty gloomy but since everybody plays that side of the road, I’ll play the other side of the road and note that in ‘05 and ‘06 we were similarly gloomy about Iraq. We said Baghdad caught in an intractable civil war, Anbar, totally lost. Nothing good’s going to come out of that government in Baghdad. Well, all three of those things turned out to be not as true as you’d think. Anbar is stabilized. Baghdad has some issues but is more stabilized. And the Maliki government is showing improvement. All of could still go straight down the chute but what I’m saying is don’t take to the bank the gloomy assessments that you’re hearing. It could be changing even as we’re debating, you know, whether we ought to stay.

   That’s a decent summarization of at least what is happening militarily. I hope it is of some interest to you.
   -Jeremy