voting. the concept that everyone who's affected by government gets a say in their government. announcer: the grand prize winners of $5,000 is from imagine international academy of north texas in mckinney, texas, for their video "what it means to be american." >> our american institution is one of the most unique in the world, where students have the powers vested in them to hold their government accountable rather than just sit around and complain. the greatest thing about the issue of corruption in the united states is that the citizens are doing it. in most cases, the people are willing to recognize the flaws even when politicians don't. announcer: over the past 15 years, c-span has given away a million dollars in total prizes to the winners of our student cam video documentary competition. the top 21 winning entries will air on c-span in april, and you can watch every winning student cam documentary online at studentcam.org.

♪ brian: matthew hoh, back in 2009, september the 10th you wrote the following. "dear ambassador powell, it is with great regret i submit my resignation from my appointment as a political officer in the foreign service, and my post is a senior civilian representative for the u.s. government in province." what was that? capt. hoh: thank you for having me here. that was almost 10 years ago.

it is hard to express how i was feeling then compared to now, and what has occurred since then. i had no expectation of that letter becoming public. i had no expectation to become an antiwar activist or a veteran for peace. tragically, i had no expectation that we would be sitting here in 2019 talking about this for an afghan -- this war in afghanistan. the way it has been escalated. the way it has escalated every year. the countless lives that have been wasted, and the continuous suffering. it is shocking to hear it. it is. it is very surreal for me to be sitting here right now with you, brian. brian: what is your background leading up to when you resigned from the state department? capt. hoh: i graduated from

college, worked in publishing doing finance. i did not have a military family background. i had an uncle that had been in germany at the same time as elvis presley. that is the biggest military connection we had. when i joined the marine corps a couple years after college, it was because i was bored, i was looking for something to do with my life. i spent time in the marine corps in okinawa, japan. i was assigned for the pentagon and worked for the secretary of the navy at the pentagon. i had a position on a state department team in iraq in 2004-2005 doing reconstruction work and political work. i lead a marine corps company back to iraq in 2006-2007 as a combat engineer company commander. i ended up receiving a direct appointment into the foreign service in early 2009. went to afghanistan. i think what i was expecting was

that, the obama administration was going to seek peace. seek an end to the conflict. president obama had campaigned on winning the war in afghanistan. when he said so, he said so in the context of sending two brigades of troops. he ended up sending over 70,000 plus an additional 40,000 nato troops and 100,000 contractors. what i saw in afghanistan in 2009 was the same things i had seen in iraq in 2004-2005, 2006-2007, as well as when i worked at the state department in between those times. there was no difference in the administrations. the administration's desires were to win for political reasons, domestic political reasons. everything else was secondary.

particularly in 2009, after i saw the elections stolen by the government, after so many had been killed in the run up to that, i could not go along with it any longer. i was basically broken inside. the fact that i am here now, still doing this, was never my intention. it just has continued to go along, almost as if my work in antiwar, or peace activism has been a way to make up for what i did in the wars. brian: what have you done the last 10 years? capt. hoh: i became a think tank expert. i have a title, i am a senior fellow. i lead a project of the afghan study group in 2010, 2011, 2012, which is the compilation of 40 or 50 different international affairs experts, retired

generals, academics arguing for basically what we are seeing end a peace process and an to the war. i tried to get a way from this type of thing. i have worked at the ymca. i sold cars. i worked as a consultant for a private family philanthropic fund. none of that stuck. i keep coming back to this. a lot of veterans, no matter what war will say, i left the war but the war never left me. that is my case. i primarily work with an organization now called "veterans of peace." i am on a couple of different advisory boards. this is what i do. i have also struggled with the invisible wounds of war. posttraumatic stress disorder, moral injury, depression,

substance abuse. in the last several years, traumatic brain injury has flared up for me, just as so many other men and women are experiencing. there is a latency to traumatic brain injury. for me it was probably from explosive blast exposure. i was around a lot of explosions. both in training and in combat. it is very similar to what the football players, or may be similar to what football players and boxers are experiencing. i have had to deal with that as well, which has been not just a challenge for me, but a challenge for my family, a challenge for my wife, a real challenge for my wife. what she has gone through because of my wounds, those invisible wounds of the wars, she has ptsd herself because of it. brian: how much combat did you see? capt. hoh: quite a bit. one of the misnomers about the wars is that men and women are

not seeing that much combat. it is the complete opposite. according to the v.a. according , to the department of defense, according to various studies, veterans of the afghan and iraq wars have seen more combat than any other veteran of american wars. as far back as the first world war. that is as far back as we have those studies and understanding. we saw a lot. even when i was a civilian over there working on reconstruction and politics and going to parliamentary meetings, and working with engineers, we were constantly under ied attacks, mortar attacks. constantly in small arms engagements. when i lead marines in iraq and 2006-2007, before the sunni awakening, every time you left your base, every time you left

your outposts, you got into a gunfire -- gunfight, or an ied went off. i saw quite a lot. it changes you. we know with ptsd, basically, you spend a year, or seven or eight months, or however long, hunting people and people are hunting you. that changes your entire body chemistry. we know that with ptsd brain size changes for soldiers who go to war and come back. when they come back from the war , their brains are different sizes and shapes because of ptsd. your body is releasing all the survival chemicals constantly and that causes you to have serious problems when you come home. for me, and for many others, and i think this is what leads into understanding why so many veterans of these wars are

killing themselves, there is a moral component to it. it is the civilians. innocents, one way or another we took part in killing. that is something you can never get past. that moral injury. you cannot get that blood offer -- off of your hands. that brings you to thoughts of suicide. that is something i dealt with a number of years. i am here because i had really great doctors at the v.a. who saved my life. brian: go back to your original resignation letter. the next day the washington post -- i believe, but i don't have it in front of me -- put you on page one? capt. hoh: above the fold. brian: headline, u.s. official resigns over afghan war. why do you think it made the

front page? did you ever ask? capt. hoh: i asked her why did you write this 3000 word, or however long expose on me? she said, everything you said in your resignation letter and what you said to me -- at this point she worked on secretary clinton's detail for "the post." she covered secretary clinton's foreign affairs. she said everyone i spoke to at the pentagon and state department, all of them agree with you and what you are saying about afghanistan. brian: in this piece it says , while he did not share hoh's view that the war was not worth said i believe with much of the analysis. hoh to join his team in washington saying, "if you really wanted to affect policy, why not be inside the building, rather than outside where you can get a lot of attention, but you will not have the same

political impact." did you talk to richard holbrook about this? capt. hoh: i did. i went to see him at the waldorf-astoria in new york. brian: what was he doing? capt. hoh: he was up at the united nations general assembly. i met with him in his bedroom. he was on his bed drinking a purple gatorade. he was shuttling in between all these different meetings. i had just met the u.k. ambassador to afghanistan who later wrote a book about the war, and how the war is unwinnable. not just unwinnable, that it was a moral failure. holbrook did offer me that position. he told me 95% of what i had written he agreed with. i left and he talked me into taking that job. i went home, took the train back home to arlington and thought about it.

a few days later i called back and said i cannot do it because i did not resign just to get myself promoted. i quit because i was quitting the wars. i am really done. i cannot do this any longer. i also knew that nothing i did would have any impact. nothing i would have worked on would have changed the war. the decision had already been made. i can tell you this from discussions with holbrook and the ambassador, they were voices of dissent of escalating the war, but they were shut down by secretary clinton. secretary clinton was very much in favor of escalating the war. you can see this very clearly, stories written in the "new york times," or in another book. secretary clinton was very enthusiastic about escalating

the afghan war to the point that holbrook and eikenberry had no voice. i knew that. it may no sense for me to join that team. it would not have changed anything. brian: 10 years later and one of the reasons we asked you to come here is because you wrote a huge piece about the last 10 years and how you feel about it now. that was in -- the title of this piece is "time for peace in afghanistan and an end to the lies." where can people read that? capt. hoh: they can find that at "counterpunch." brian: what is that? capt. hoh: i am not sure how long it has been around for, but to say it leans left of center is probably not saying enough about it. it has been around for a long time. it is a very good, very thorough,, very in-depth look at

american politics and the world from a left of center perspective. brian: the word lies is in the headline of your piece. what lies are you talking about? capt. hoh: from start to finish with this war. with the notion of who we put in power in afghanistan, that somehow these men we put in power were democrats, or were in favor of women rights, let alone the fact the complete ignoring of their roles as warlords, as war criminals, as drug lords. the notion that the taliban had never wanted peace. brian: when you say democrats you are talking about the iraqis afghanistans?istan'

capt. hoh: yes. what we were creating in afghanistan was a democracy, when in reality, it is a predatory and corrupt system. the lies continue into when things are discussed about the drugs in afghanistan. you hear about the poppy crops and the drug trade is primarily done by the taliban. that may be true now because the taliban has gained so much land the last two years. for most of our time in afghanistan, the drug trade has been in control by the afghan government and the afghan military. the lies that go on, that somehow american boys and girls are over there killing and being killed in order to keep a safe, -- keep us safe, that if we are not there another 9/11 will happen. that is completely belied by the fact that osama bin laden was an

afghan, but the 9/11 hijackers spent more time in the united states than they did in afghanistan. the most important safe haven for those hijackers were in the united states flight academies that they went to. the preparation took place in germany and pakistan. they had meetings in spain, malaysia, possibly in the uae. the idea that they needed afghanistan, as the jets that struck the twin towers took off is one ofhar airport the greatest and tragic lies. what that lie does is it dishonors the memory of everyone who has been killed. whether they have been killed on september 11. whether they have been killed in combat. whether they have been killed of innocents in the afghan war. not only that, we act as if the

afghan war was hatched on september 11. when this war started -- i was born in 1973, you can trace this war to the time the king was killed. if i was an afghan man, i would have to live my whole life with at best political chaos and normally war. that is another lie that somehow this war began on september 11. that it has not been going on for over 40 years now. you can unpack these things and go further into it. the reality is is that, we are going to be hitting 18 years, years come october in terms of how long our troops have had been on the ground,

killing and being killed. we talk about this with the soundbites that are completely unrelated to the reality of the conflict there. brian: i will say something that may not be perfectly accurate, but you can correct me. you almost never hear anybody in this country talking about the afghan situation. not entirely, but members of congress don't talk about it. once in a while there is a hearing on it. why do you think that is? capt. hoh: i agree with you. i had a friend of mine running for congress last year. in a year and a half she spent campaigning, she got exactly one question about the wars. not about the afghan wars, but the wars in general. if you look at what journalists turse has -- if you look at what journalists have done, or what the cost of poor project has done, we have active combat operations in 14 different countries. we are bombing at least seven nations.

so today, today, as people watch this show, we to lives of people in seven different countries. and we will do it again tomorrow. it is not just a discussion about the afghan war, it is a discussion about all the wars. what we are doing overall. not just in the middle east, but now throughout africa. why this is? i think that there is -- you can contrast it to what i was told was that it is like during the vietnam war. the vietnam war was on during dinnertime every night. i think there is a real fear in much of the media to negatively speak about the war to get into , details about the war. i also think, and this is something that certain people talk about a lot, it is hard to talk about something complex in two or three minutes or in 500

words. so for much of our media, it is framed. it is not like the show where we have an hour to talk. this is great journalism. this is what it is supposed to be, right? you have two or three minutes. i one time was asked by a an argumentbout about whether afghanistan is a safe haven. i started to explain that they do not need beast kinds of safe havens. how much room do you need to plan a hijacking? or you need somebody's apartment, or a backyard. you do not need much. he said, whoa, i cannot go into all that. that will take up too much room in a column. i think a lot of it is the fact that, once we get a narrative going -- not just with the wars, you could probably say this about the health care, social

security, or any other issue. once you get a narrative going, it is really difficult because of the way our media is set up in 2-3-minute segments or 500-600 were columns, to go back and reassess that narrative. brian: you talk in a lot of these pieces and there is so much in there that we won't get to half of it. we have a map that we will put up on the screen that shows afghanistan and where the pastune area is. -- is over and pakistan. in pakistan. what would you want people to know about your experience in this area? capt. hoh: going from left to right. the far left is iran, afghanistan, pakistan, and then india. understanding that up until 75

years ago after world war ii, there was no pakistan and india. there was only the one country ruled by the united kingdom. the same going back now over 100 years. the border between afghanistan and india as it was at that time did not exist. it was drawn, like so much of the muslim world, so much of africa, so much of parts of asia by european diplomats. just basically drawing a line down the map. what you have there on the afghanistan and pakistan border is the duran line. the idea behind that was for the british, who had gone to war three different times in afghanistan, never successfully, always very bloody, always a punch to the nose, they never achieve their objectives.

the idea was to divide the pashtun people with the border. what you get is the pashtuns, which, by some estimates, are the largest tribes in the world, divided by a border written by a british diplomat 100 years ago. afghanistan is a country made up of many different ethnicities, different religions. you have the pashtun people who are in afghanistan, they constitute for about 40% of the afghan people. they are primary in the south and the east. what you have found over the last 40 years in particular was that, whether it was the united states, the soviet union, or other nations, we have utilized

those ethnic differences for the purposes of the war. we saw this first under jimmy carter's presidency. burzynski was a national security advisor at the time. his idea was to fan the flames of not just muslim unrest in the soviet union, because the soviet union at the time extended all the way down to afghanistan, to cause ethnic problems and religious unrest in the soft underbelly of the soviet union. that begins this long process of ethnic division. a division that did not exist. very similar to what happened in iraq where the sunni

divide in iraq did not exist. certainly not violently. the civil war that was raging in iraq 10 years ago until the united states invaded. you can trace this back to the native americans. the united states military has used a policy of playing off one ethnic group, one religious group, one tribal group against another for centuries now. the importance and understandings about the pashtuns in afghanistan is that they constitute or nearly constitute the whole of the taliban insurgency. they constitute almost nothing of the afghan government and afghan military. you can point and say the president of afghanistan is pashtuns, but that is like pointing to president obama and saying that because we had a

black president of the united states, we do have any racial problems in the united states or that there is not a wealth gap between blacks and whites in the u.s. because we had a black president. you had this in surgeons is completely composed of pashtuns, against a government and an army that from what i saw was only 4% pashtun. brian: you are talking about the army of afghanistan? capt. hoh: yes. the army of afghanistan. the last i saw only 4% of their , soldiers were pashtun. brian: in your letter 10 years ago you said the afghan government's failings when weighed against the sacrifice of american lives were waging against the metastatic. the first one on the list is glaring corruption and unabashed graft. where is the corruption and who gets the graft?

capt. hoh: first of all i would say, and i think many americans who look at this would understand that the graft starts here in this country. where corporations receive the bulk or the bulk of the funding for the war. i remember when i was working reconstruction work in iraq, 40% of every dollar, so, $.40 on every dollar that the congress appropriated for iraq reconstruction never even left the united states. for overhead and management costs, it went to corporations here in the united states. the same occurs in afghanistan. everybody takes their cut. not just in a way that you would think of corruption to grease the wheels to make sure the machine works. this is unabashed.

you can look at what we know about it. we know that billions and billions of dollars each year, in cash, are moved out of kabul airport. we know that there are billions of dollars. more money and cash leaves the kabul airport out of afghanistan than the afghanistan budget. brian: where does it go? capt. hoh: it goes to dubai, new york, local banks. brian: who is doing this? capt. hoh: everyone who is somehow connected to the war. that includes the highest levels. brian: are you talking about americans? capt. hoh: no. the americans get the money through what others would say is -- others outside the united is becaused say

corruption is cooked into the system. as i said, 40% of every dollar that the congress appropriates for building bridges in afghanistan stays here in the u.s. it goes for the corporation overheads. brian: do you have any idea how the physical money gets from here to kabul, then physically gets from kabul to places offshore? capt. hoh: i had this in iraq. it is very similar. when i was in iraq running my reconstruction programs, one program i had was $50 million. it was all done in cash. the most money i ever had was $26 million in my possession. i get that in safes in my bedroom, and we paid that money out in cash. it came right from the federal reserve, was shrink wrapped in hundred dollar bills. you can get $6 million in your standard duffel bag. that standard green duffel bag, that holds $6 million.

that money arrives in pallets in iraq, afghanistan, syria, libya, or wherever these wars are taking place. it is then moved under control of the u.s. government and military and it gets paid out to various mechanisms, various projects, various programs, building schools, paying teachers. brian: you take some of that for yourself? capt. hoh: i never did. brian: i mean, could you? capt. hoh: absolutely. brian: did you know anybody that did? capt. hoh: yes, i did. my predecessor in iraq left the day that i arrived. after i showed up, $200,000 was found in his bedroom. i took over for this guy and he had just pages and pages of paperwork, no pay receipts.

no receipts of -- because the way the wars were running. because of the desperation. because of, what other choice do you have? if you are in iraqi or general contractor, you will take whatever is coming to you. if i had thought about it, i could have moved the money up to kurdistan and gone back and got the money. but looking over your shoulder all the time from the fbi or whoever. there have been a good many stories of this money showing , it mean added states because it comes from the federal reserve.

the banks know that this money should not show back up in the u.s. but it has. it shows back up around fort bennett, around camp pendleton, california because it is so easy to take this money. to get it back here requires a bit of work because you have to go through customs. but if you're only going to take $40,000 or $50,000 back rather than $4 million, you will probably get away with it. no one is looking for that. or afghanistan side , after that money arrives in afghanistan and then changes hands to the afghans, and various people take their cuts, that money gets transported directly out of afghanistan. because of wikileaks, we know the afghan vice president showed up in dubai with $55 million in his suitcases, u.s. taxpayer money that he was just bringing with no repercussions. brian: you know this. why doesn't the congress know it? we have had john on this network many times, who is a special ig for afghanistan. he talks about this.

does it seem to matter? you don't ever hear any of this has stopped. capt. hoh: it is very frustrating and heartbreaking. brian: let me read something you wrote in your latest piece. the idea of military success has -- and hard-won gains has been nothing but homicidal war propaganda trumpeted by u.s. and the world's largest public relations operation, and bleated obediently by politicians and, shamefully, journalists, and the pentagon spends -- sorry about the way i am reading, on psychological operations and they had annual fees for all of it clients of less than $900 million. where did you get that figure? capt. hoh: $900 million is linked in the article.

it is through some public relations institute. brian: where did you get the $5 billion? capt. hoh: that is government data. that comes out of the blue book. if you go to one, you could go to the department of defense website, and the budget is there . you can go to opm. or you can google what is the pentagon's budget for public relations. there have been numerous articles written about this. none of this is hidden. this is well known. i am blanking on exactly what source i used. sourced.g is it is sourced using u.s. government, or u.s. military data,united nations afghan government data. or if it's journalism -- i am not using some far left or far right alternative media. i quote from the new york times

the most in there. brian: let me ask you this. i know what some people in the audience think only have these -- think when we have these guests on. people out there are saying, ptsd has gotten to this guy. he is a left winger. he is way over there. he has no sense of the responsibility of the u.s. government has to stop all of this. what do you say to them? capt. hoh: i would say use your own brain. brian: what are your politics? what are your overall politics? what were they before you went to the marine corps? capt. hoh: i voted for bob dole in 1996. in 1992 was the first time i couldn't vote and i didn't like any of my choices and i did not vote. i voted for dole in 1996 and went into the marine corps. being a conservative like most of my family was. at some point around 1999, 2000, i started moving more to the left.

now i am in many ways a socialist. if i was european, i would be a member of the left party. i have come to understand the world that we have to work together. i am a civil libertarian, so i am against government surveillance and against government telling you what to do in your bedroom. i am, i am at what libertarian socialist. brian: what the socials and mean to you? socialism means we are working for the benefit of

the whole as opposed to individuals. which i believe is what capitalism is about. i am a believer that we need to come together to move forward, and we have done that in the past. our best examples in this country is when we have moved forward, we have done it together. my beliefs are that, there is no way we can survive. when i say survive, i am talking about climate change. i am a talking about divisions in this country. i am talking about the dangers of nuclear war, which is something we hardly ever talk about. brian: let's go back to the afghanistan situation. oh: that is a whole different episode. brian: let's go to february 8, 2019. here is video of the special representative of the government trying to negotiate with the taliban. is there a way to define the taliban? capt. hoh: they are not a monolithic organization.

the best way to describe it is they are primarily pashtun groups fighting against foreign occupation and against the government in kabul. as well as traditional enemies. this war goes back to the 1970's. these men, their grandfathers fought originally in the 1970's. much of this goes back to conflicts and grievances and rivalries that go back for decades. brian: let's watch this and give me your reaction. [video clip] >> after many conversations, we have reached an agreement and principle with the taliban on a framework that would provide guarantees and enforcement mechanisms that no terrorist group, international terrorist group, or individual would be able to use afghanistan as an area of their control. should they be part of the future government against the

united states, its allies, and others. [end of video clip] brian: what is your reaction? capt. hoh: the taliban has been saying that for over 10 years. you look at the statements from that time, their supreme leader would produce annual statements. he would say exactly what has been said. when osama bin laden was killed in 2011, the taliban's official statement about that was we , respect him because he fought against the soviets, he fought the americans, and we respect him, but his war was not our war. our wars in afghanistan had nothing to do with the modern. brian: here is the current president from afghanistan from 2001-2014. i want your reaction. [video clip] >> the united states is not

there because it is fighting for -- because it is fighting in afghanistan, it is fighting for security. second, we have engaged in open dialogue, the united states has a sovereign and a global power and is entitled to it. but we need to get the departure right. are the fronta fundamental reasons that brought the united states to afghanistan, are those objectives accomplished? [end of video clip] brian: that within a month of february. capt. hoh: i am very suspect of the afghan government because the government has been propped up by the united states. the desire for the afghan government to see the united states leave is not there. brian: how much does the war in -- has the war in afghanistan cost the american taxpayer? capt. hoh: almost $1 trillion.

brian: how many people have we lost? capt. hoh: 2500, plus another 1800 or so contractors, and we are relying on the veterans affairs figures. you cannot untie the afghan and iraq wars because the money crosses over. in terms of total cost you are looking at what it is going to cost in terms of the future, $6 trillion. according to brown university, just on debt payments on these wars, because we are paying for these wars, we are not funding these wars. they are basically being paid on a credit card. according to brown university, we have already spent over $700 billion just on debt payments, and interest payments for these wars. in regards to the bodily cost, the physical cost of the wars, when you look at suicide data from the department of veterans

affairs, 9000 american soldiers and american men and women who have served in iraq and afghanistan have killed themselves since coming home from the wars. brian: how close did you come? capt. hoh: i came very close. a number of times i had the cat in the crate and the dog was getting leashed up. i was going to my vet to drop them off and i was going to kill myself. there has been times i walked into the walmart and look at the gun i was going to use. i have been fortunate that i have not owned a weapon or else i would not be here. i came close. brian: how do you stop from going that far? capt. hoh: there is a couple of things. one, i have professional help. that is the reason why. secondly, i called the crisis line. i have called the people dedicated to answering those calls.

a number of times that i called them. and that saved me. but the only reason why it was because i got professional help. the first time i ever got professional help was the beginning of 2012. my first therapist was in the navy and had gone through similar experiences. that is the only reason i trusted him. so many commodities wars, and if you did not carry a rifle, i will not listen to anything you said. i needed someone i could trust. he was the one that got me on the path to be able to be here with you today. i was laying on the floor broken down in 2012. i had to decide, either put that gun in your mouth today, or get help. fortunately, i chose to get help. brian: when did you get married? capt. hoh: we got married this past year. we have known each other since 2004. we met in the pentagon.

we had a saga, but she has known me since before the wars. she has seen me every time i have come home with the wars, she has been with me in so many ways. we have been back together for five years or so. yeah, she is a veteran of this war as much as i am. brian: back in 2017, here is general david patraius. he was the boss in afghanistan. let's watch this. it is not very long. [video clip] >> this is a generational struggle. this is not something that will be won in a couple of years. we're not going to land the flag and go home for a victory parade. we need to be there for the long haul. we have been in korea for 65 plus years because there is an important national interest for that. [end of video clip] brian: we need to be there for the long haul? capt. hoh: absolutely not. this is something the general has said.

our presence causes these insurgencies. for everyone "terrorist" we kill, we create 10 more. this is knowledge, well-known knowledge. when i signed up to go to afghanistan, and the general took on central command. he was in charge of the middle east for the united states military. i remember very clearly his thoughts were that, his words were that we would seek peace and talk to the taliban just like we talked to the sunni insurgency in iraq. what strikes me so much about the comment about korea, as we have seen what has happened in the last year and a half with north korea, it happens because we are talking to them. just like what happened in iraq with the sunnis in 2007, 2008, when i was there, all we did was start talking to them.

the violence stopped. they came forward with their grievances. we said that is understandable. we worked to figure out a way past that. that is what we are seeing now with the talks in afghanistan. all it took was us saying, yes, we will talk to you. now there is a potential peace process. brian: i want to show you a chart. it is because of reading your stuff and the background. there is one of these organizations you are a member of called "world beyond war." what is that? capt. hoh: that is exactly like it sounds. it is an organization devoted to creating a world without war. --sounds pollyanna -- pollyannaish. i tell you what, there is no other alternative. brian: the u.s. census bureau is showing the number of bullets

that this country sends over the years. if you look on the chart, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 through november. if you look at some of the numbers that worldwide we have sent cartridges and parts thereof to 474 million. then it goes down the list. afghanistan is 123 million bullets. canada is 74. it doesn't explain why. do you have any idea why? capt. hoh: this is just the example of amount of bullets. not planes, not tanks, not ships, but just bullets. whether it is 762 millimeter. just the amount of rounds we export as a country each year. one of the titles, subtitles i used in my piece was -- even a

losing war makes money great it -- money. it is true. the amount of money involved in these wars is what allows them to continue to go on. it is what underlines the wars. it is campaign donations to members of congress. it is think tanks that are funded by the defense industry that then go into congress and say this is what we are going to do. i met with senator bob casey's staff, pennsylvania, democrat on a senate committee. -- senate foreign relations committee. he has a military officer on his staff, like most members of the senate and house do. the military officer told me, you know what, seven out of 10 briefings that we get on afghanistan or iraq does not come from the cia, pentagon or state department, it comes from these outside think tanks. like the institute for study of

war, american enterprises that receive millions of dollars each defense industry. this money is circular, and that is one example that even a losing war makes money. brian: i believe ryan crocker, i want your reaction to this. [video clip] >> you have to understand the pakistani perspective. we walked out on them in the early 1990's after the soviets defeat in afghanistan. we slapped sanctions on them and headed home. the pakistanis are not going to forget that. we have to provide some assurances that this time we are not going home. this time we are going to stay with whatever forced composition makes sense because we have vital interests at stake. [end of video clip] capt. hoh: that is one of the myths. this idea that we left afghanistan when the soviets left. we didn't.

we continued to fund various groups for over three years until the government and kabul fell. we had no interest in the peace process. that led directly to the civil war and that brought about the taliban. as i just heard this again recently, over the last couple of decades, the pakistani people have seen 70,000 people killed through terrorist acts. --eard that and it made me it really startled me. that amount of people would be the equivalent -- we have three and a half times the size of pakistan. you are talking about 200,000 to 250,000 americans being killed over the same period. the pakistanis have very legitimate grievances, some that

ambassador crocker speaks to, but others we don't talk about and don't acknowledge what these wars have cost them. that was a good example of the myth. we didn't. we stayed funding those groups for years after they left. brian: here is jack king talking about this subject. [video clip] two 2008 -- to 2008, afghanistan was on a diet. we never provided adequate resources. the taliban reemerged and gained momentum. he was able to put forces in. then obama put forces in in 2009 and 2010. short of the commanders by 25% and then pulled the forces out 15 months later. we have never, ever gone about this thing appropriately with the right strategy and right amount of forces. [end of video clip]

capt. hoh: he is one of those craving warmongers i was talking about. he has institutionalized ba madness, i believe. he is completely -- he is not stating factually what occurred in afghanistan. brian: why wouldn't he? hoh: why wouldn't he? he is on a tremendous number of awards for companies. if people are aware of the recent controversy of the trump administration to sell nuclear technology to saudi's without the approval of congress, the company that is involved in ip3, the general founded the company. he is on many different arms companies. brian: you're suggesting that he is not a good american, he is

not patriotic, it is about his pocketbook? capt. hoh: absolutely. i have no problem saying that. so many people have died, so many people are living life of hell because of men like general king. we do not ignore afghanistan for all those years. we went after the taliban mercilessly. we were backing warlords who were trying to settle decades-old quarrels. we were backing druglords for all of those years. we started expanding nato and afghanistan in 2006. it was only when we got to the american sector in 2008 when we put americans in. they talked about shorting the commanders by 25%. we did not have the troops to do it. we just did not have that many troops to send. besides, obama sent 70,000 american troops. he sent 40,000 nato troops, he sent 100,000 contractors, it is 200,000 troops.

he wants you to believe that more would have made a difference. brian: right after your letter of resignation ended up in the front of the washington post, barack obama said the following on december the first about more troops. [video clip] president obama: we will pursue a strategy that will break the taliban's momentum and increase afghanistan's capacity over the next 18 months. the 30,000 additional troops i am announcing tonight will the -- will deploy in the first part of 2010. the fastest possible pace so they can secure population centers. they will increase our ability to train competent afghan security forces, and they will help create the conditions for the united states to transfer responsibility to the afghans. [end of video clip] brian: 10 years later.

capt. hoh: at that point he had already sent 40,000 troops. something that was barely talked about while he was doing it. he sends all these extra troops. i wish president obama was here now to explain how he felt about it. if you read books like obama's wars by bob woodward, you see he was very skeptical. i remember when president obama received recommendations in the fall to continue to expand the war in afghanistan, he said, has it ever worked? they could not show him where it had worked. at the pentagon, all they did was give him small, medium, large escalation. the large escalation was impossible because we do not have that many troops.

what president obama does in 2009 is, the smallest was 20,000 troops, i will cut the difference 30,000 troops. brian: we are about out of time. i want to make sure we go over some things quickly. if people want to read your article "time for peace in afghanistan and an end to the lies" where did they go? brian: they can go to counterpunch.org. brian: you served how many years and the united states marine corps? capt. hoh: 10 years. brian: you served and how many different war situations? capt. hoh: iraq twice and afghanistan once. i worked for the state department in afghanistan for a period of five months. i could not do any more than that. brian: before i forget, what is the white flour on your lapel? capt. hoh: most people are familiar with the red poppy that

recognizes the deaths of soldiers. the white poppy recognizes the death of everyone involved in combat, soldier and civilian alike. it is to remember all the losses and all of the suffering of war. brian: how have you recovered, at what point have you recovered from ptsd, the concussion, and all that stuff? capt. hoh: i take 19 pills a day, sometimes as many as 26. the migraines, the exhaustion of being overwhelmed, mood issues, i go to therapy weekly. i have a great therapist at the washington, d.c. v.a. it is my primary -- i only do things like this when i am able to. i certainly do not work. i am 100% disabled. i can't work, basically. i just a have the ability to do it full-time. after an interview like this, sitting with you for an hour, i will probably sleep 14 or 16

hours to recover. the next couple of days will be not good days for me. live by the sword, die by the sword. i am not saying this to gain sympathy, other than just to communicate so that people understand that these wars do not ever really end. that they come home and stay home with us. if we continue them, or expand them or begin new ones, we will have a whole new generation of young men, women, and their families and communities that are going to live through that kind of hell. brian: matthew hoh, thank you for joining us. ♪ [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> all q&a programs are available on our website or as a podcast at c-span.org.

>> next sunday on q&a, author robert caro on his book "working, researching, interviewing, writing," that is q&a next sunday at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span. >> next, live with calls and comments on "washington journal." homeland security secretary addresses the policies for her department in 2019. be was on a government circuit called pbs. in 1979, a small network with an unusual name rolled out a big --

let viewers decide what is important to them. the doors for policymaking to see, bringing unfiltered content. in the age of power to the people, this was true people power. thehe 40 years since, landscape has changed. there is no monolithic media. youtube stars are a thing. c-span's idea is more relevant today than ever. no government money support c-span and is not part of the government of washington that is provided by your satellite provider on television and online. c-span is your unfiltered view of government so you can make up your own mind. >> this morning, jason grumet, from the bipartisan policy center looking at budget proposals and legislative changes that could help end washington gridlock,