Three Former Top CIA Agents Say War In Afghanistan Making World More Dangerous (VIDEO)

In a powerful new documentary, "Security" from the Rethink Afghanistan project, three former high-ranking CIA agents explain why the war in Afghanistan is making the world more dangerous, rather than safer, for Americans.

Robert Baer, former CIA field operative in the Middle East and the author of "See No Evil," says: "The notion that we are are in Afghanistan to make our country safer is complete bullshit."

And Graham Fuller, former CIA station chief in Kabul, emphasizes: "Both wars have made the world much more dangerous for Americans and for any American presence overseas."

Watch the video:

Comments

[RTIII]

10:28 AM on 08/28/2009

My response is, "duh!" Anybody who doesn't instantly recognize this is ... Naw, I'll not state the obvious again!
.

[scottpot]

01:26 PM on 08/25/2009

I*m wondering if anyone thinks that the private security companies who are making millions on the war in Iraq and Afghanistan want the violence in those countries to end? Do you think security contractors might be responsible for creating more violence in order to get contracts and money for themselves?

[mcmchugh99]

01:19 PM on 08/25/2009

There may be better ways to deal with this problem than the course we're on right now, which looks like a major escalation and a conventional war strategy. And Obama is very cautious and timid--I'd even say fearful--of going against the military, the intelligence agencies and the Republicans.

They sense this, too. Last time, we had a president who didn't know enough to control them, and now I suspect that we have a president who's scared of them.

This is shaping up to be pretty bad.

[lkhstar]

08:50 PM on 08/24/2009

We are just breeding more hatred for Americans over there and giving the Taliban more fodder for recruits. If we really want to help the people of Afghanistan and prevent the insurgency we need to address the country's social and economic problems, NOT send more troops

[Myra Donnelley]

08:05 PM on 08/24/2009

If Al Qaeda is not in Afghanistan why ARE we there?

[johnsonc20]

12:50 PM on 08/25/2009

Because Obama wants to make the Military Industrial Complex happy - and he wanted to look "strong" during the Presidential campaign, i.e., he had to support getting out of Iraq to win the primary, so upping the ante in Afghanistan became his way of expressing his Presidential "toughness" to our perpetually confused electorate. It is important to kill foreigners if you want to prove you are of Presidential timbre these days. Now, like Bush, he is stuck with his previous statements and commitments. It is a sick mess and another example of the paucity of leadership within our new administration.

[eciaccio]

02:43 PM on 08/24/2009

But the U.S. absolutely-tootly MUST have access to the Caspian Sea oil & gas and MUST be able to protect a U.S. oil corporation pipeline from there through Afghanistan to the Indian Ocean and MUST have geopolitical position and hegemony versus Russia and China! We just MUST!

The U.S. Global Empire is sooooooooo much more important than Afghani, Pakistani, and American lives.

Oh, almost forgot: we STILL need to kill bin Laden and continue to punish the people of Afghanistan for allowing al-Qaeda to train there (even though the 9/11 attacks were allegedgy planned in Hamburg, Germany, which we have decided not to bomb).

So the Iraq-Afghan-Pakistan-Columbia-Somalia-Yemen Full Employment and Profit Guarantee for Military Contractors Policy is still in effect, regardless of which political wing of the Corporate War Party is "in control" (nudge-nudge, wink-wink) of the White House & Congress. How reassuring.

[louisamast]

02:43 PM on 08/24/2009

They failed to mention that increase in terrorism and world insecurity creates more demand for arms and military equipments, missiles and bombers. Consequently it is good for companies that manufactures and exports arms which mainly are Americans and Is_realis. Russian, Chines and French ones also benefit too. Why do you think Russia agreed to allow US to use her territory as supply route to Afghanistan. Russia wouldn't mind to see US sinking in this marsh land deeper and deeper.

[apoyo]

02:23 PM on 08/24/2009

And they wait 8 years to say this?

Why?

[talkitreal]

02:16 PM on 08/24/2009

DO these FORMER CIA agents realize that Pakistan has Nuclear weapons, that AlQueada, and the Taliban wants to get their hands on! We cannot allow that to happen!

[Jon60]

02:28 PM on 08/24/2009

Exactly how does our occupying and fighting in Afghanistan prevent that from happening?

[GeoLee]

02:13 PM on 08/24/2009

Too little and much too late. IF we had put the same number of troops into Af\Afghanistan in 2001 as wer placed in Iraq, we might have gotten bin Laden and crushed the Taliban, but wasting 8 years and trillions of dollars of resources makes this a Russian experiences remake.

[babaji5150]

03:45 PM on 08/24/2009

The Sudanese govt. offered bin Laden's head on a platnium platter for over a month in 1996.
One month after the offer was repeatedly declined, bin Laden fled to Afghanistan and set up shop.
I was in Afghanistan in 1998 when another opporitunity presented itself. By the time a green light was given, bin Laden was gone and an empty bunker was blown to bits for show.

Too little too late?....2001?......8 years & trillions?......Wanna try that again?

[babaji5150]

06:58 AM on 08/25/2009

As I expected,.......crickets

[not going2take it]

01:28 PM on 08/24/2009

Efforts to pirate the poppy-fields cloaked as a
defense of our well being, us defending our
rights? to their natural resources?

For . W . H . A . T ?

Afghanistan for .o.p.i.u.m. resources.
Iraq about .o.i.l. resources.

[zizyphus]

01:13 PM on 08/24/2009

I am reading Robert Bar's book right now. I have learned more about the Middle East from this, and it doesn't look good. Iran is going to be the next big superpower, as it controls the Strait of Hormuz. They have the biggest army in the region.

[SammyD]

12:55 PM on 08/24/2009

The body count is escalating in Afghanistan. Why isn't Obama fulfilling his promise to bring the troops home? He's no different than Bush.

[kelcuk]

01:37 PM on 08/24/2009

He can complete a sentence, looks cool and calm under pressure, and is well liked by our allies (for the moment). But essentially you are correct. The wars go on and on and are escalating, Guantanamo is still open for business, he's given more hundreds of billions to bail out Wall Street crooks and incompetents. His economic team is made up of former Goldman Sachs execs (just like Paulson) and his Defense Secretary WAS George Bush's Sec. of Defense. The similarities outweigh the differences, that's for sure!

[AndyWright68]

12:53 PM on 08/24/2009

Duh! The more countries we bomb the more people in those countries and around the world will hate us. Americans don't seem to understand this. Here, look at it this way. If China was going around and bombing every country it did not like and setting up their perceived perfect form of government all over the world you would hate them too. Get it?

[databaze]

12:46 PM on 08/24/2009

money money money money... 4 reasons for the US to stay in another country and kill people