Christopher Hitchens Discusses Obama's Iraq, Afghanistan Plans (VIDEO)

Christopher Hitchens appeared on Hardball tonight to discuss President Obama's plan to withdraw a significant number of U.S. combat troops from Iraq. Hitchens, an early and very vocal supporter of the Iraq war, said Obama and the Democrats have been "saved" by Iraqi Prime Minister al-Maliki because once the Iraqis themselves start asking the U.S. to go, people who warn against a withdrawal start to look "out of step."

We must bow do federalism and Iraqi wishes, Hitchens stated, but we must remain "within swatting distance of al Qaida" and we cannot simply leave the area completely because "the Gulf is a choke-point for the world economy."

Hitchens real warning, however, came about Afghanistan. He asked: "Do people understand how much the president is committing the United States to an endless war in Afghanistan? [Obama] wants to draw down these soldiers [in Iraq]... so he can send them to Afghanistan."

Perhaps the harshest criticism of Obama from Hitchens came at the end: "the model on which Obama ran, that there's one bad war we can't win and there's one good war that we should be trying harder, is almost exactly wrong. Iraq matters far more to us" than Afghanistan.

On a lighter note, Hitchens is showing no signs of injury after he was beaten up by Syrian thugs in Lebanon. The columnist was traveling with a couple other reporters when he came across a campaign poster for a skinhead, Syria-loving political party and, Hitchens being Hitchens, could not pass up the opportunity to deface flier, scrawling on it "Fuck the SSNP". Unfortunately, some members of the party happened to witness this, and promptly beat him up. I cannot quite believe that Matthews passed on the opportunity to ask Hitchens about the incident.

Watch Hitchens, opposite Joe Conason from the New York Observer, on Hardball below.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Comments

[MikeCanada]

Simple answers are almost always wrong. However, I don't understand why the President doesn't just pull all of the troops out of these nations and let them solve their own problems. America has enough problems internally to be bothered fixing these horrible nations.

[southwindow]

allow the farmers to grow opium. we use it for every pain killing drug imaginable- codeine, morphine, etc.
destroying opium production would destroy the one valuable crop afghanistan has.

other wise, we need an actual plan that includes a similar time table to iraq.
These wars should be completely over by obama's first term.
Everyone knows Bin Laden is no longer within afghanistan proper so staying their under the pretense of looking for him is completely disingenuous.

[princessk]

Good point about the opium. The fact that there are legitimate uses for it sometimes gets lost in the "war on drugs" rhetoric.

[Ergon]

Absent in any discussion about Afghanistan is a discussion of Drug production. The CIA has being funding its secret operations through the drug trade, in the Golden triangle, in Central America, and now, in Afghanistan, and US allies there, including the so-called Pakistani Taliban, are all drug traders, but its easier to sell this as a war against fundamentalists.
Many banks are knowingly complicit in this, dependant as they are on the liquidity afforded by the cash economy of the trade.
And American and Afghan lives are being lost for nothing.

[mightbesane]

For the Renaissance man that Hitchens claims to be, it is curious that he should be operating as a lobbyist for the oil industry. When he says that the Middle East is a chokepoint for the world economy, he is simply toeing the party line of those who would have us believe that it is more important to expend lives and treasure defending Arab sheiks and the international companies that profit from their oil reserves than it is to save American lives and expend money at home to eliminate our addiction to foreign oil.

Juat as it took a few generations to appreciate the Truman Presidency, so one day Ike will be remembered for his eloquent (yes, Eloquent Ike) warning against the military-industrial complex and we will al wonder why we didn't heed Carter's call to revamp our energy policy.

And as someone who is convinced that we are in a twilight struglle with Muslim extremists, Hitchens must know that our policy as regards India/Paki­stan/Afgha­nistan is much more vital to our national security than Iraq could ever be - minus the need of Americans to snort oil by the barrel full.

[hegdehog]

Hitchens is delusional. If we don't get Afghanistan and the FATA under control, we're looking at decades of problems. Part of the solution is to end the acrimonious, adversarial foreign policy approach of the Bush administration. But part of it will be military. Iraq's future, at least in the near term, is already set in stone. I believe they'll be under the control of a religious dictator within a decade no matter what we do. Our job from here on out will be to limit our liability and adapt to the changing situation.

[carljr]

Much as it pains me to agree with Chris Hitchens he's half right. The Afghan surge is a scary proposition becuase I think the Bush folks put the operation on life support and I, though I understand and agree with the argument for involvement in Afghanistan and Pakistan, i remain pessimistic and believe it could be the piece of the Bush legacy that could do the new Administration great harm.

[bubbuh]

Why didn't the douhgboy remind Hitchens that al Qaeda is headquartered in Afghanistan, not Iraq? He might also have pointed out that people like Hitchens have been "out of step" since 2003. His having managed a safe withdrawal from his boorishness in Lebanon does not mean he has any expertise in either war or politics. When the US starts a drunken street fight, perhaps, someone will think to call on Hitchens to take advantage of his rich experience as a poor loser.

[princessk]

I was thinking the same thing. We are in Afghanistan as a direct result of terrorism. The same is not true of Iraq. What is it about these Brits and their obsession over controlling Iraq? They've been doing it a lot longer than we have and don't seem to have learned from their mistakes. Tony Blair tarnished an otherwise promising legacy by going gaga over the Iraq invasion. Hitchens has always been rabidly pro invasion, to the point where he chronicled in Vanity Fair a "vacation" he took in Iraq shortly after the invasion. (It was in a rather stable part of the Kurdish region.)

Afghanistan needs more friends than just the US. I hope Obama realizes this and can get other countries and international organizations to help with stabilizing that country. Just the job for the community-­organizer-­in-chief.

[bubbuh]

I agree. I hope Obama and crew can put together a major league coalition to dig out al qaeda, possibly including Russia, China, and some of the secular Islamic states out of the former USSR. Maybe, this is a pipedream. But, such a coalition would relieve the pressure on Pakistan; and, as long as the Afghans are sure this isn't about occupation, it would help the shaky central government there.

[mergina]

To hell with policy and what Iraqi's running the country for their own gain think, GET US THE HELL OUT OF THIS COUNTRY NOW! Every day we are there, bush and cheney and haliburton and the rest of the greed fueled minions who took us to war in a conspiracy for their own monetary gain ARE LAUGHING AT THIS ADMINISTRATION, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, AND THE REST OF THE WORLD.

[Ergon]

The U.S. has enough oil reserves to last the next two centuries, with new reserves being found all the time, here and in South America, for example, but faux environmentalists and oil companies are promoting the 'peak oil' theory. I trust USGS figures instead of the oil companies, but that's not my point. The choke point philosophy refers to the fact of controlling OTHER COUNTRIES source of energy. China, and Japan are major consumers of M.E. oil, but as long as OPEC countries are selling oil at $16 a barrel or so (the rest goes to middlemen) then the U.S would rather get M.E. oil, and control the people there. Not just a superpower, but a bullying one.

[hegdehog]

"The U.S. has enough oil reserves to last the next two centuries."

That's news to everyone in the universe except you. Where, precisely, are these magic reserves located? Does it have anything to do with Disneyland?

[Ergon]

Still looking for your defense of Hubbert, who published his theory in 1958.

[krocklin]

Drill baby drill.

[hegdehog]

By the way, T. Boone Pickens--one of the world's richest and most successful oilmen--disagrees with you (as did Bush and Cheney, which is why they invaded Iraq and tried to gain control of their oilfields). "I'm a disciple of Hubbert,'' Pickens says. "I think we've peaked and we are going to see an undersupply of oil.'' Hubbert correctly predicted the collapse of oil production in Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas, and a post-hoc analysis of recent oil production and discovery declines proves that Hubbert's curve is one of the more accurate and reliable predictors available. You can't argue with math.

[Ergon]

Being rich and successful is not a guarantee of being right, though i can see where a certain amount of dssimulation might help you get there. Hubbert's curve has been disproved by vast new oil field finds off of Brazil and Cuba, the White Tiger oil field, revised reserve figures in the Gulf of Mexico and the North Shore, even within the Bakken oil field in the west, and the dates for peak oil have been moved further and further back. There are oil fields in Africa which were discovered in the 1990's then quietly closed off for future production (see where manufactured conflicts are flaring up right now)The OPEC minister has said there is no oil shortage. Now I'm not interested in arguing with oil company shills who would rather use insult than fact, but I suggest people google Abiotic oil, and check out US Geological Survey figures for themselves.
The fact is that Russians don't believe in Peak Oil theory, and, combined with innovative deep drilling methods, have become one of the largest oil producers in the world, and gone from becoming net importers to large scale export.
But then, expecting Americans to be well versed about oil production might be an uphill battle, but I can provide links for the non-time wasters.

[carnelld]

I agree with Hitnchens on several points. Obama did run on the "bad war-good war" concept. Obama said he would end the Iraq war (the bad war) and pull the troops out in 16 months. He also repeated that we should send more soldiers into Afghanistan( the good war) .

Most people were so tired of the Iraq war and wanted it over ,they overlooked Obama's second position on Afghanistan. Now Obama is committing more troops into Afghanistan and does not appear to have an end game strategy. That is what happened in Iraq. That is also what happened in the Viet Nam war.

Everyone is enthralled by Obama's election and the good things he has/will accomplish, but we should also watch what is going on with the militarism our government continues in those third world countries.

In my book there is no "good war". We should be demanding Obama pull our military frm both countries and Pakistan also.

Otherwise, we are no better than George W. Bush and those who engineered and fought the war in Iraq, including Cheney,Patraeus, Gates, Rice, Perle, Wolfawvich, etc.

[londongal]

Unfortunately, Carnelld, it's not as simple as pulling our military from these war zones. The US is committed to these regions until they can be somehow stabilized. Iraq is crawling in that direction-­-Afghanist­an is not.

By the request of commanders on the ground, the Prez was advised to send more troops as reinforcements for the soldiers already in Afghanistan. It's a terrible situation with NO easy solution.

The Prez will have to work closely with Afghans diplomatically, to resolve this issue.

[Lillopa]

Htichens said: The Gulf is a choke point for the world economy--that says it all and why Bush attacked Iraq--and not the real terrorist in Afgans. Bush never had the intentions to go after the real terrorist of 911 it was always Iraq right from the beginning whether 911 happened or not!

[Hirnlego]

Of course oil is important. Cheney didn't map out those Iraqi oil fields pre-nine eleven for nothing.

[adamsmith3]

I hope Obama provides us with a timetable to leave in Afghanistan provided it will inevitably be long, drawn-out, and more costly than Iraq. It's kind of funny to hear Gibbs talk about paying for universal health care and paying down the deficit in part by drawing down operations in Iraq when operations in Afghanistan are being escalated (essentially canceling out any small cuts that are made in Iraq).

[Lillopa]

It was never about the real terrorist of 911 Bush was going to attack Iraq anyway--Hitchen said it all...The Gulf is a choke point for the world economy ..

[latinopride]

It makes much more sense to get out of Afghanistan. The only solution is to withdraw completely. The former Soviet Union with half a million soldiers couldn't do it, even while being physically next door, we certainly will not do it with under 50,000 and half way around the world! President Obama's advisors are showing a severe lack of intelligence on par with the Bush league, on this issue.

[cinesimon]

But he's not even presented the plan yet!

[latinopride]

I'm sorry but when the president orders 17,000 troops to Afghanistan, I'm going to assume that it is part of a plan regardless of whether or not it's been formally presented.

[ghenry]

Hitchens is slowly morphing into Rush Limbaugh.

[bubbuh]

Hitchens is just another neocon. with a teflon conscience. He's vey big into others's evil; but, constantly forgets his own.

What Hitchens had to say about Hussein and Iraq in 1976:

"An Arab country with the second largest proven oil reserves, a fierce revolutionary ideology, a large and recently-blooded army, and a leadership composed almost entirely of men in their thirties is obviously a force to be reckoned with. Iraq, which has this dynamic combination and much else besides, has not until recently been very much regarded as a power. But with the new discussions in OPEC, the ending of the Kurdistan war and the new round of fighting in Lebanon, its political voice is being heard more and more. The Baghdad regime is the first oil-producing government to opt for 100-per-cent nationalisation, a process completed with the acquisition of foreign assets in Basrah last December. It was the first to call for the use of oil as a political weapon against Israel and her backers. It gives strong economic and political support to the ‘Rejection Front’ Palestinians who oppose Arafat’s conciliation and are currently trying to outface the Syrians in Beirut. And it has a leader — Saddam Hussein — who has sprung from being an underground revolutionary gunman to perhaps the first visionary Arab statesman since Nasser."

Oops.

[Ergon]

The self promoting Chris Hitchens needs to get the facts straight on his alleged assault.
The SSNP poster he defaced did NOT have swastikas. See http://joshualandis.com/blog/?p=1616 for a picture of their logo which is a combo of a crescent and a cross, and appeals to minorites, mostly Christian, but is NOT a 'skinhead group either.