Next month will mark the one-year anniversary of the launch of President Obama's escalated military campaign in Afghanistan. One year later, violence is still getting worse and costs are skyrocketing.
When President Obama sacked Gen. Stanley McChrystal and then appointed Gen. David Petraeus he was forced to do something he's not done before: stand on a line and make a critical decision that would have lasting consequences.
I think that the many tributes to Richard Holbrooke are important and wonderful, but I want folks to see beyond caricatures of a very complex and important global player.
If The Great Game: Afghanistan and 150 years of that country's history proves anything, it is that this miserable area of the world is a black hole that baffles armies, swallows invaders, and eats its young. No one wins.
It is impossible to overestimate the significance of leaks from the military to the media, particularly to Bob Woodward and his paper, the Washington ...
Fortified by rounds of new polls, the election has become an endless handicapping session. This mania for handicapping remains electoral, but it could be applied to so many things, including the state of the world as seen from Washington.
Afghans cannot take control in 2011.
Why doesn't Woodward report on how this power struggle between Obama and the military is being influenced by his own reporting-and explain why these generals are willing to keep dealing with him if the result is that they themselves are jettisoned?
Nine years after the start of the war, the Taliban controls 70% of Afghanistan. Though it is heart-rending to consider abandoning the progress that has been made, the truth is that there simply is no military solution.
We've been making progress for nine-plus years now, progress into the deadliest year for U.S. troops since the war began, progress into record levels of suicide terrorism directed at Americans. No more progress, please.
Can anyone name a single way in which this war still serves the national interest, if it ever did? We talked to a group of veterans of the conflict, and their answer was a very clear, "no."
Krauthammer's record of predictions in the realm of foreign policy is so horrid that it would probably surprise even many of his detractors.
For almost four decades, under cover of his supposedly "objective" reporting, Woodward has represented the viewpoints of the military and intelligence establishments. Often he has done so in the context of complex inside maneuvering.
Prince Abdul Ali Seraj is a direct descendant of nine generations of kings of Afghanistan, and also the president of the National Coalition for Dialogue with Tribes of Afghanistan Here we discuss President Karzai.
As that great military strategist Sarah Palin once said, "I am merely attacking from a different direction."
High military officials and their media accomplices ardently oppose pullouts in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and the president is either unwilling or simply unable to confront them.