today at 130 p.m. eastern, live on c-span, c-span.org, and the c-span radio app. ♪ >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. >> you think this is just the community center? no, it is more than that. >> comcast is combining so students in low income families can get what they need to be available and ready. >> comcast supports c-span, as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front rosita democracy. -- front row seat to democracy. >> yesterday, the pentagon announced the u.s. it ended its military mission in afghanistan a day before the deadline. coming up this morning on "washington journal," we will get an update on afghanistan from politico's lara seligman,

and a discussion on the withdrawal of troops what the heritage foundation's james carafano and adam weinstein of the quincy institute for responsible statecraft. be sure to join the conversation with your phone calls, facebook comments, text messages, and tweets. ♪ host: after 20 years of u.s. military engagement, some 2400 u.s. military deaths and millions of dollars in american military material left behind, the u.s. war in afghanistan is over. president drive -- president biden will address the nation today, just days after speaking to the families of those that died recently. good morning, it's august 31, 2021.

we start the program asking you about the legacy of the afghanistan war. what does it mean for the future of the u.s. reputation. are we safer from terrorist threats? the lines to use for republicans are (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents and others, (202) 748-8002. if you are and afghanistan war vet, that line is -- an afghanistan war vet, that line is (202) 748-8003. you can use that same line to send us a text. we will look for your messages on facebook, twitter, and instagram, @cspanwj. the headline of "the wall street journal," reflected across the country, very simple, america's longest war ends, with a picture of the plane loading for

departure yesterday in kabul, 3:29 eastern time. one photo you might be seeing in the news as well in a number of places is a night vision shot. this is a tweet from u.s. central command. the last american soldier leaves afghanistan. chris donahue is the commander of the u.s. army 82nd airborne division as he boards the c-130 in afghanistan. they used the same photo this morning in the associated press reporting, ending america's longest war, the united states completing its withdrawal from f anna stanley on day, ending america's longest war and closing a chapter in military history likely to be remembered for colossal failures, unfulfilled promises, and a frantic final exit that costs the lives of 180 afghans and 13 u.s.'s -- 13 u.s. service members, some barely older than

the war. that's from the associated press. we are joined on the line by a defense reporter from politico. good morning. >> good morning -- guest: good morning, thank you for having me. host: we showed that photo of chris donahue exiting. not the typical kind of final departure ceremony when the u.s. wraps up an engagement. was there any other kind of ceremony to market? -- mark that? guest: not really, they were the last americans on the ground yesterday, two of the last, one of the last flights out of the country yesterday. it's really a historic day. we cannot forget 2400 american lives that we lost in afghanistan over the last 20 years as well as $83 billion spent on the country. it's really a huge effort and to

see it go out like this, this was certainly not the way the biden administration wanted to end this or. the one celebration that happened on the ground last night was from the taliban, they were shooting guns into the air and celebrating the end of what they called the american occupation of afghanistan. it really speaks volumes about how far this has fallen from the scenes that the administration really wanted going into this withdrawal. over the past couple of weeks you have seen the taliban walk into calvo, -- kabul, the afghan government collapse, and the scenes of chaos were all over the news. this massive, massive evacuation effort finally wrapping up yesterday after evacuating tens of thousands, i believe it was 120,000 over that amount, the largest u.s. military airlift in u.s. history.

while the massive airlift was a success, as general mckenzie said yesterday, there was just no way to get everybody out. there were still several -- several hundred americans on the ground, tens of thousands of at risk afghans, refugees, interpreters who worked with the u.s. in their allies and it is really a big russian about what's going to happen to them that. host: taking a look at -- big question about what's going to happen to them next. host: what does the region look like going forward for the u.s. military? guest: over the horizon is one of those military jargon words now. all it means is coming from outside afghanistan. for example, the drone strike the other day that took out two isis targets in kabul was a drone that bombed over the

horizon likely over the gulf, qatar, one of those countries. the problem here is that it's a very long flight. by amanda aircraft it is nine hours from the gulf to afghanistan and by drone it's a long flight as well. the difficulty is the drones cannot stay on mission long. really, we have limited capabilities here, though these are the only capabilities we have. it's very difficult to get to afghanistan from the middle east and it is going to really limit our ability to strike at terrorists in afghanistan. with zero troops on the ground, you have to assume that there are at least some levels of cia operatives that with very few people on the ground it will be difficult to find any of the intelligence that we need about where the terrorists are at, what the taliban is doing to go

after them and strike them. well we have some counterterrorism capability, it has been diminished. host: you wrote about this, the planning for the anticipation of a strike like this at the pentagon. what did you learn and how did the pentagon prepare? were they surprised by the quickness of the attack? guest: so, they actually were not surprised about the attack. they knew about the attack within a 24 to 48 hour window and down to the specific location it happened at at the gate. what i reported on was detailed notes from three separate phone calls at the highest levels of the pentagon one day before the attack, showing that the pentagon knew exactly when and where the attack would occur. they did take many measures to try to prevent the attack, to try to close the gate and thin out the crowds so that they

could spot any type of threat. what ended up happening was the gate was not closed on time is planned on thursday afternoon before the attack happened. the americans decided to open the gates for little bit longer to let the british evacuate their personnel. they had of course accelerated their withdrawal and they still had people at the nearby baron hotel. that is why, unfortunately, american service members were still at the gate processing entrance at 6 p.m. on thursday when a suicide bomber walked up and that's and aided his vest. host: how was your report received by the pentagon? guest: the pentagon of course was not happy that the information was leaked to me. yesterday john kirby, the pentagon spokesperson, he condemned what he called the unlawful leak of classified

information at such a sensitive time as the operations are wrapping up. of course, politico is aware of this activity and there was certainly information that we withheld, knowing we didn't want to put any troops in harm's way and didn't want to jeopardize the operation either. i think that while the pentagon was not happy, politico and myself, we handled it as responsible journalists should. host: thanks for being with us this morning. guest: thank you so much. host: opening the program today asking you about the legacy of the afghanistan war. the lines are (202) 748-8001 for republicans, (202) 748-8000 for democrats. for independents and all others, (202) 748-8002. for afghan war vets, (202)

748-8003. william, ohio, good morning. caller: good morning. this is the first time calling. i think the legacy of afghanistan's american ignorance. first of all, they should have learned the lesson of dwight eisenhower and harry asked truman, -- harry s truman, who said korea was a mistake and an endless war. we go through vietnam, kennedy said in a press conference in 1962 that i do not intend to get bogged down in vietnam. he knew we shouldn't do it. and then we go to afghanistan, 2001. america should have read "the new york times," the back of the

first section. osama bin laden wrote a dossier or whatever saying that he hit the buildings and his main objective was not to knock the buildings down, but to bankrupt america. he said america will have to spend billions in money securing the airports. they will invade and will get bogged down and -- bogged down in an endless war. osama bin laden was not a genius . america was ignorant. host: all right, to the afghan war vets line, dustin, good morning. caller: the way i look at it, no

matter how you look at it through history, from the revolutionary war to our current theaters that we are dealing with, when it boils down to it, everything is what they call an endless waltz. whether it is worldwide, whether we are a superpower, whether we are not a superpower, we have to deal with ourselves domestically or internationally. everything is an endless waltz with repeats. peace or revolution, war, peace. that is truly what i believe. as a native american growing up in this culture, dealing with the history of my people, i understand that everyone has their own rights and

individualism, but the reality is that everything is an endless waltz. you will always have war, peace, and then. host: when did you serve in afghanistan? caller: 2001 to 2003. host: bill is next in orange park, florida, republican mine. the legacy of the afghanistan war? caller: i never thought i would see anything in my lifetime that would ring democrats and republicans together but i have seen it now. 2022, 2024, even the democrats could withstand seeing people killed and they are going to vote and get somebody out of office, bunch of cowards. host: yesterday the announcement was made about the final flight out of afghanistan by the

centcom commander, frank mckenzie, announcing at a briefing at the pentagon. [video clip] >> i'm here to announce our completion of the withdrawal from afghanistan and the completion of evacuations of mobile afghans. the last c-17 lifted off from the airport august 30, this afternoon at 3:29 p.m. east coast time and the last demand air aft is now clearing the airspace above afghanistan. we will soon release a photo of the last c-17 departing with major general chris donahue and ross wilson aboard. while the military evacuation is complete, the diplomatic mission to ensure additional u.s. citizens and eligible afghans who want to leave continues. i know that you are going to hear more about that from the state department shortly. tonight's withdrawal signifies the end of the military

component of the evacuation and the end of the nearly 20 year mission that began in afghanistan shortly after september 11, 2001. a mission that brought osama bin laden to a just end along with many of his co-conspirators. it was not a cheap mission. it was 2461 u.s. at risk members and civilians killed with 20,000 injured and sadly that includes 13 u.s. service members killed last week by an isis-k suicide bomber and we honor their sacrifice today as we remember their heroic accomplishments. no words from me could possibly capture the full measure of sacrifices and accomplishments of those who served, nor the emotions they are feeling at this moment. i will say that i am proud that both my son and i have been a part of it. host: we welcome your tweets and we are taking a look at some of the members of congress and their thoughts on the legacy on the final day in afghanistan.

congressman andy biggs with this, america's longest war has ended -- it should be a good day but instead of this withdrawal, 13 families will not see their loved ones come home. sheldon whitehouse has bravo to the intelligence agencies, and airlift in a dangerous and tumultuous situation like that, something no one else could do. senator dan sullivan saying that after 9/11 the military deployed to afghanistan to make sure it would never again be a safe haven for terrorists and the biden administration's haphazard withdrawal assures it will be a safe haven for terrorists for years to come. from jamie raskin, the last military planes have left afghanistan, ending the longest war in u.s. history and we will have time to analyze the efficacy of the war and our exit but tonight we mourn the brave soldiers that sacrificed their

lives to bring 120,000 people to safety. senator tommy tuberville with this, it's appalling that the biden administration is pulling out before they know that every american has been safely evacuated. they need to stop dodging these russians. we have a duty to act and get all americans out. let's get to calls again. thomas, new jersey, democrats line, welcome. caller: hey, how you doing? host: fine, thank you. caller: listen, we talking about wars in different nations. what about the war going on in the united states? not talking about the airplanes and the bombs. talking about people. talk about the republicans and the democrats. when are they going to stop fighting and blowing each other up with their mouth? when are we going to stop the hatred wars that we have every day? when are we going to stop the insurrection war right in our

own country. we worried about other countries, people are killing us -- killing each other in this country. trying to help other people? help yourself. help the united states. we got trouble. we got problems in the white house. already the leadership is talking about jump. host: all right, windsor on the republican line, good morning. caller: good morning. there's an essay on the containment of russia. [no audio] [inaudible] host: we lost you, going in and out. say it again. caller: george kelly wrote an essay on containment. most american wars have been limited wars with limited objectives and achievements. korea was limited.

vietnam was limited. afghanistan was limited. they had limited foreign policy agendas. americans find that hard to deal with because they are into the concept of total war, like world war ii. winning and losing wars for americans, for most americans, comes down to was it a total war or was there a conditional surrender. afghanistan was always limited in objective but at some point in time it became [indiscernible] [inaudible] host: i'm going to let you go there, we got the gist of what you were saying but you are breaking up their little bit. houston, texas is next. caller: one positive, one negative. we brought the modern world to a country stuck in the middle ages. look at how many wanted to leave their country.

most of those people want to come over here. the negative is we may owe the people, not the taliban government, reparations for invading and occupying their country for 20 years. the people involved in 9/11 who attacked us were from saudi arabia. bin laden was a citizen of saudi arabia. we should have told saudi arabia to take care of him. thank you. host: 12 days until the 20th anniversary of 9/11. at the pentagon briefing yesterday, john kirby was asked about those remaining in afghanistan, the americans still there and those allied with the u.s. and their fate. [video clip] >> a number of us have got reports from american citizens or vulnerable afghans on the ground who have been getting notices that the evacuation is over. what happens next for those left behind?

will there be any sort of military operation to help get them out of the country? >> i think you heard secretary blinken talk about this. for americans and other individuals that want to be able to leave afghanistan after our withdrawal is complete, the state department is going to continue to work across many different levers to facilitate that transportation. as i said earlier, right now we do not anticipate a military role in that effort. host: american interpreter biden left behind in afghanistan, "i don't believe in anybody anymore." the citizen who worked as an interpreter in afghanistan was left behind by president biden and told cnn "i don't believe in anybody anymore, i can't believe that no one told me this was the last flight."

host: again, she was on cnn last night. reaction on social media and by text here. this one says -- we had to get out of the rat hole to show how bad it was. look at the young military members who died the other day. just horrible, it had to end, says chris. gary from rod chester says taliban. craig in north carolina says the legacy will be one of failure, our enemies are emboldened, allies are dismayed, and worse there are still some americans there. this one says shameful to leave them. the people left behind should be brought here if they want. many will just switch sides.

it will save lives. let's hear from bob in chicago and the democrats line. caller: hello, sir. love c-span. it was 72 or 73 when they told me to try out and go back to school. since we left out of afghanistan , you know, why don't they bomb, when they have a holiday and are shooting guns when we left, why don't they do that when we train 300 people and they didn't do nothing? why don't they have a holiday when they hear from us after 20 years. they are going to have a holiday? they can have a holiday on that, too, since they were

shooting and i don't see nobody in no country that wants to go and get in a line with hundreds of thousands to go to afghanistan. but y'all sure tried to come here. thank you. host: jerry, west virginia, republican line, your thoughts on the legacy of the afghanistan war? caller: thank you for taking my call. i just turned republican last friday. i've been a democrat all my life and i think america needs to hold their head down and about in shame today. i'm in shame. i voted for biden. i think he's the sorriest that ever happened to this country. everything he's done has failed. the border, security for this country, energy for this country, inflation. the man has failed us at

everything. he's not a president. i just think america should live in shame. i was a democrat. host: did you vote democratic last time? caller: i voted for biden. i've been a democrat all my life. host: you switched last friday? caller: yes. host: was that because of the attack and because of the president's handling of the withdrawal? caller: i definitely believe it was his handling. i believe it's going to be a whole lot worse. all these people calling in that says we shouldn't be there? how can we give the country up to terrorists. that's what the taliban is, terrorist. host: the president speaking on the u.s. withdrawal coming up this afternoon at 1:30 eastern and we will have it live here on

c-span and we will have it available to listen live on the free c-span radio app. let's hear from carl, next, in oxford, massachusetts. independent line. caller: it breaks my heart but i have to say it, the united states is like a terminal cancer patient or a drug addict or an alcoholic who is in denial. we have been creating our own enemies decades. we are supposed to be self-sufficient, they have been telling us. we don't need anybody's oil, we have our own resources. we could bring all the troops home, we could defend ourselves. i'm sure we still have the best navy and air force. we could protect ourselves and leave those countries alone. they have their own problems. i just want to say, keep your eye on maybe ukraine or africa.

they are going to start, they are going to start trouble somewhere else. i just feel it, you know? thank you for c-span. host: ok, jim in grand forks. is that northern north carolina or nebraska? caller: in between. north dakota. [laughter] host: in between. the d is not showing, completely ruined it. doing great with geography this morning, jim. go ahead with your comment. caller: [laughter] i just wanted to say the legacy, i didn't want to get into anything deep about it. i'm a trump supporter, i'm a conservative. i don't blame biden that much. i really don't. he's in a bad position. i voted for george w. bush and i haven't heard one comment from him, one speech. he's down there in his little suburban enclave outside of dallas.

i voted for him, i cheered him when i went in there -- when he went in there right up until iraqi. i have to admit that the libertines were correct when they wrote letters to my papers back in the suburbs of philadelphia when they were talking about be careful about the patriot act, you are going to regret it. building a foundation for a bureaucratic orwellian mechanism of a surveillance state. i have to admit i just waved to the flag but they were correct and he should take responsibility more than anybody , even more than biden forgetting us in there. one more thing, the legacy, we will see the legacy. i have experienced the legacy from pennsylvania and north dakota of failed wars. we haven't won a war in 25 years -- 75 years. the vietnamese came into philly and work to the meatpacking plants when i was a younger guy. their work somali refugee's all

over north dakota. i have had some run-ins with them that are not so pretty. not all wonderful. a 14-year-old girl in fargo murdered by asa molly in broad daylight. a cop killed by asa molly with an ak-47. not all refugees are wonderful. i want to see this, i want the refugees relocated to liberal enclaves. i want them in georgetown and martha's vineyard up there with obama and hillary. they always put them in white working-class neighborhoods, from lewiston, maine, to minnesota and north dakota and they always don't ask the permission of the people for them to come in. but they won't, they won't put them where the white liberals live. that's a little secret. i hope they put them in those kinds of areas. host: all right, thanks for your call, jim.

this is from the front page of "the new york times," a solemn pullout in the last flight, news analysis from "the new york times," saying that unlike the soviet feet, the american landscape was not one littered with the destroyed hulks of vehicles. they left all the arms and equipment needed by the taliban for years to come, the product of two decades of training and equipping the afghan military and police forces that collapsed in the face of dwindling u.s. support and poor leadership

host: maxine, independent line, we are talking this morning about the legacy of the afghanistan war. caller: good morning.

i hear that this is a withdrawal. it's not. this is a surrender. we have surrendered to terrorists. i watched the lady last night on cnn that's been abandoned by the american government. it broke my heart to hear her talk about how she has no faith in anyone anymore because they have been so lied to and they don't know what to do, hunker down with 38 people, waiting for the taliban to come get them. god only knows what will be done to them. it was a mistake for us to go in there. no doubt about that. it's also a mistake to abandon your people. this was the ultimate cowardice of the united states. i'm so ashamed to be even

associated with it. it breaks my heart. i never thought i would see the american government just throw their people to the wind and say you are on your own. i just can't deal with it. i'm sorry. i just can't take it. thank you and i hope y'all have a good day. bye-bye. host: this headline this morning, "taliban reportedly have control of u.s. biometric devices, 30 2 million afghans are tagged in a system that the dod and afghan government use for criminal prosecutions, background checks, and prosecutions. dan crenshaw on how he and other veteran congressmen are reacting . here he is. [video clip] >> there is no elation that this "war," has ended. the war has not ended.

they know, especially goldstar families, i had a meeting with a bunch of goldstar families seal team last week. the goal of the meeting was to kind of see where everybody is at, how are you guys feeling? turns out there were no existential questions about whether their son or husband had died in vain. that was the worry, the people feel like sacrifices were made in vain. nobody had that opinion. everybody knew know, what do we get for 20 years? no more 9/11's. no attacks on the homeland from this threat that caused 9/11 in 2001. fortunately, we were not at war on september 10, 2001. we were not at war when the uss cole was bombed or in 1998 when the embassies were bombed or 1993 when the world trade center was bombed, but somebody was at war with us. we were just pretending like they weren't.

after september 11, we stopped pretending. unfortunately, today began pretending again. we began pretending like we ended a war. i hope no one rights headline that says we ended america's longest war, we ended no wars. we did give up a strategic position in the war, in the fight. it will now be extremely difficult to deter or deny terrorists. we just can't do it. there are no air fields nearby, no resources. they will likely close down the cellular network and the internet, making it an impossible target. we don't have eyes and ears on the ground anymore and the homeland is at more risk than it has been in 20 years. host: texas congressman crenshaw there and other vets, talking about the afghanistan war. we are asking you this morning

about the legacy of that war. market watch writing about the costs of the war over 20 years and why americans will be paying for the costs of the war in afghanistan for decades. they write that this week the bombings, talking about philanthropy in the form of loans and student that relief for military members that served in harm's way but first, interest payments on the post 9/11 wars. the bombings this week that killed troops are a stark reminder of the human toll of the war and even if joe biden meets the deadline to pullout the troops by august 31st, americans will be paying the financial costs of the war for decades to come because the nation largely financed the wars through debt. according to an initiative from scholars at brown university, taxpayers --

host: reaction by text and twitter. bill in shoemaker, his thoughts, we could have exited years sooner if the afghan government and army had proven their give me freedom or death principles, afghanistan will dissolve into a civil war. isis is qanon, taliban are the evangelists. this one says hundreds of americans were abandoned. 13 young troops were killed and several wounded. billions and equipment left behind, that's the legacy we won't forget. this one says the legacy will be one of 20 years of lost blood and treasure that did more to enrich military contractors then make americans safe. kudos to biden for not getting

bogged it into combat again. oklahoma, clyde on the democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning, god bless y'all, god bless america. some people don't want change. don't know what to tell them. 20 years is a long, long time. time to get out. god bless y'all. host: kenneth is an afghan vet in florida. morning. caller: good morning, john. if you can give me a minute, sometimes you listen to all the things that people are saying. anyway, john, americans just never learn from their past. they never learn. they haven't learned from slavery, they haven't learned from the operations, that crazy word that they used to send the

mexicans back or when we had an individual talking about muslim bands. every time america starts something on a racist agenda, they end up paying for it with their tax dollars. just like the man who called to say that they should, the refugees should go to white liberal neighborhoods. they don't send those people to know white neighborhoods, they settle in black and brown neighborhoods. i don't understand why these people can't stop with their racist thoughts on everything because at the end of the day they end up paying with their tax dollars. thank you, john. host: david, independent line, will milwaukee. hi there. caller: how are you doing? host: fine, thanks. caller: the elite class of this country are dumb and stupid. some of the things they do are unreal.

they are a bunch of idiots. but the fact is, i'm not an idiot. other americans are. i'm thinking we have got to get rid of this elite class in our country and we have got to get regular people into politics that have common sense. i haven't seen common sense for the last 40 years in this country or in our government. have a good day. host: pinehurst, patricia, go ahead. caller: biden has blood on his hands and so does everyone who voted for him. he might as will just back into her room. the only thing we ever see is his back. people come here for freedom while a government body is seeking socialism. that's all i have to say. host: ok, we will hear from tim, next in wisconsin. tim in wisconsin? go ahead with your comments.

tim in wisconsin, turn down your television and go ahead with your comments one more time here. you are on, go ahead. caller: first of all, i would like to say that my heart goes out to the 13 servicemembers killed last week. i think it's long overdue that we get out of there. 9/11, we were justified in going in there. but then the bush administration automatically turned 300 million muslims against us. the whole muslim world had our back to start with after 9/11 and now we fast-forward to the day of trumpet back, showing those taliban leaders -- trump back, signing may 1 came and gone. the biden hands were somewhat tied.

i will agree that he botched things up to some extent, he should have done better. they were saving their ammunition, trump signed an agreement. it was all over the country, they were waiting to attack us. host: long-term, do you think we are safer from terrorist attack after 20 years in afghanistan? caller: somewhat. this is a landlocked country some 7000 miles away. can't believe we didn't disarm them with computer chips. it's a lot of guns and ammo that they are going to use against themselves because it's the fighting season now. you will have al qaeda, the taliban, isis-k, and every other muslim terrorist out there fighting each other. they are landlocked, now the iranians have to worry about it,

the pakistanis have to worry about it. they been quite quiet. they are in bed with the taliban, you know that. take out saddam hussein? that was the worst enemy of iran. you know? host: appreciate your call. front page of "the washington post," america exits afghanistan . the war may be over but for biden a perilous new phase. withdrawal of the final u.s. troops from afghanistan on monday marks the end of the u.s. military presence, but for president biden the end of the forever war is more of an inflection point and actual conclusion. the departure of forces enters us into a new phase of entanglement that could prove perilous and no less challenging for american leadership and the two previous decades. let's hear from mike lauderdale,

florida. republican line, go ahead. you are on the air. caller: i just wish that c-span would go back into your archives and look up the interview with bin laden's oldest son, you can get it on "washington journal," he was talking about his book and he said that when his father and he and his mother, his first wife, were in sudan, sudan was offering on a silver platter to clinton in 1998, to clinton and janet reno bin laden, but they refused to do anything about it and they already knew that he was behind the bombings, the embassy bombings in africa. if we, if clinton had done

something in 98, we would not have had any of these wars. i don't know how clinton can be sleeping at night. the clintons are involved in all of this. they are the ones who could have done something from the beginning. so, if you go back to your archives, i remember watching this on "washington journal." host: ok. frank is next, north hollywood, democratic line, good morning. caller: for that last caller, go back in the archives and see where you were when trump stood on stage and sided with vladimir putin on national television, pushing world leaders around. where were republicans when trump was doing this crazy insane stuff? my question is, not even a question, my statement is, i'm glad we got out of afghanistan. it's been enough.

it's going to be mayhem regardless of who handles the situation. to think that biden sat there and said let's just pull out the military, to hell with personnel and whatnot, that doesn't seem right. there's a reason for how it went down. we are going to find out. i also want to say this, it's important to understand for the republicans out there. you need to calm down, relax. everything is so political. calm down, take it easy. why is there so much hate and anger? this lady calling up, biden is an embarrassment to our country? trump was the worst ever as far as being an embarrassment. right? calm down, relax. it's all going to come out, what happened. that explosion that took place? that was going to happen regardless.

host: yesterday after the withdrawal was complete, secretary of state antony blinken talked about the fate of those still remaining and his expectations of the taliban. [video clip] >> we will hold the taliban to its pledge to let people freely depart afghanistan. the taliban is committed to let anyone with proper documents leave the country in a safe and orderly manner. they have said this privately and publicly many times. friday a senior taliban official said it again on television and radio. any afghans may leave the country, including those who worked for americans, if they want, and for whatever reason there may be. more than half the countries of the world have joined us in insisting the taliban let people travel outside afghanistan freely. as of today, more than 100 countries have said that they expect the taliban to honor

travel authorizations. just a few short hours ago, the united nations security council passed a resolution enshrining that responsibility, laying the groundwork to hold them accountable if they renege. the national chorus on this is strong and it will stay strong. we will hold them to this for foreign nationals, visa holders, afghans. we will work to secure their safe passage. this morning i met with foreign ministers of all the g-7 countries. as well as qatar, turkey, the european union, and the secretary-general of nato. discuss how we will work together -- we discussed how we will work together to reopen the civilian airport as soon as possible and we appreciate the efforts of qatar and turkey in

particular in making this happen. this would enable chartered flights, key for anyone wanting to depart moving forward. host: that was the secretary of state yesterday looking at the legacy of the afghanistan war. this piece, "secretary of state anthony blinken said sunday that the united states still has significant leverage over the taliban and if so, the biden administration must use it endlessly until every afghan with a legitimate claim to refuge has found it." some top -- thoughts from twitter and by text, jerry from arizona says that he likens the afghanistan war to forcing someone to go to counseling. everyone knows it only works when the patient wants it to. you cannot force a lifestyle and people if they don't have the same idea themselves. glenn in kentucky said that we went in for osama bin laden and

accomplished 10 years ago and we stayed in for a greedy defense contract boondoggle. don in michigan, the secretary of state confirmed that 200 americans are stranded in afghanistan. biden kept his promise to the taliban but ro get to america. this one says all the people talking about ayden with lot on his hands, blame bush who knowingly sacrificed our soldiers for lies. think about that, the military is a volunteer job, blame the generals. you can send us a text that (202) 748-8003 -- text at (202) 748-8003. when, democratic line. caller: good morning to everyone on c-span and around the nation. a lot has been made of the fact that americans have been left behind. i watched that interview with the woman on cnn, who was trying to finagle visas for 39 other

people and then was upset because she was trying to sneak six kids and a fake husband into the air work. you know, these americans who are mostly dual nationals knew that the united states were leaving and they decided to stay, for whatever reason. they had known that the u.s. is leaving since april and they decided to stay. it's on them. it's not on biden. being upset because some people got transferred out and some didn't, that is on them. the united states does not have responsibility to airlift 34 million people out of that country because they want to leave and you are upset because you can't get your friends out. we were supposed to be exiting the people that worked with our

forces. not every person in that country. it's time that it's over. it's unfortunate what happened with the marines outside the airbase. fog of war, things were going to happen. i'm just glad we are out of there. host: our line for afghanistan yvette's is -- afghanistan veterans is (202) 748-8003. kevin is on that line. caller: good morning, sir. how are you? host: fine, thank you. caller: i guess i'm going to talk about the legacy. everybody is talking about what happened in they are laying it at the feet of the president and rightfully so. as leader we are taught that the buck stops here, but we are forgetting, as some of the callers understand, less talk

about starting with the last administration, where you had stephen miller who actually put a stop to people trying to come over from afghanistan who helped us. and then you had others who would, because of their own personal or their own professional reasons for their advancement, they decided that they wanted to "make america for americans." i understand what they are doing, but the problem is they are getting away and not being held accountable in the bottom line is we did this and it has left us with a legacy of basic cutting and running. when we helped the rishaad dean -- mujahedin against the soviets, we cut and rain.

-- ran. the perception now is the same. whether it's true, the facts will tell us differently, but that perception is there and therefore that's going to be the legacy people are going to remember. host: how long were you in afghanistan and what are your feelings day? do you feel the legacy of your service will endure? caller: i was there for a year. yeah, i feel that the people in the things that we did helped the afghan people and helped the tribes and the people in the tribes that were there. but once again, you know, i'm with myself and my colleagues that were there. we were, you know, we were therefore a certain reason and we were able to do that.

we were fairly successful at it, but i know that when we leave, everything we have done will be erased. host: all right, we will hear from eddie, next, phosphor, maryland, republican line. you are on the air. caller: hello? hello? host: you are on the air. caller: yeah, i'm talking. are you there? host: yeah, we are. listen to the phone, don't listen to your television. caller: personally, i think joe biden did the right thing. i ain't no democratic voter or anything because i don't believe in a lot of things they do, but i believe he did the right thing trying to get us out from over there because we only been over there for 50 years and it's time for us to leave. host: ok, washington, d.c.'s next, independent mine, bryan's neck. go ahead. caller: good morning, everyone.

i find it a bit hypocritical for republicans to mention anything about these people who have died in this 20 year war. they have no feeling for, and they are responsible for east 400,000 to 500,000 deaths with covid, them and their president. but it doesn't seem to matter to republicans. it only matters, you know, that we went out this way, that's how they look at it. doesn't matter that they are spending trillions over there. but you can't spend anything over here for our people. i find it extremely hypocritical. it's like the 600,000 that died in this country mean nothing. what they have done with the anti-, anti-mask, the outright carnage that we have in this

country doesn't matter. it only matters what they say and they make the story go this way. biden did the right thing. he definitely should have gotten out. i would like c-span to do a story on the general dynamics, the halliburton, the people that took money. those people are still there, they are contractors. they knew when trump was an office that it was time to leave and they didn't, so they decided to stay and now they are crying because they can't get out. host: this is the headline this morning from "the washington times," approval of handling afghanistan plummets, more than eight in 10 want troops to stay until all americans have been evacuated on the volatile nation, even as the president sticks to his deadline for getting out.

the abc news poll found that 59% of americans disapprove of his handling of afghanistan while only 38 percent approve and disapproval is a stark turnabout from late july when 55% of americans approved of his performance in afghanistan and 41% disapproved before the country fell swiftly to the taliban, precipitating frantic evacuations. springfield, virginia, we hear from ron next on the independent mine, go ahead. caller: i think i'm bringing something unique to the table, let me finish my point and don't cut me off, if you would. right now in congress they are on the verge of expanding social service to include women. i don't know if you have talked about that. as these caskets are being loaded on the trucks, everyone in america, please, please understand that could be your

daughter, granddaughter, and nieces. going forward, these crazy occupations are not ending anytime soon. reach out to your congressperson and tell them do not vote to expand the draft. hopefully there will be a silver lining here, as with the end of vietnam, when the draft was ended, our otcs were kicked off of college campuses and we pulled off this crazy military mentality that we had in this country for a few years until the early 80's when carter brought back draft. reach out to your congresspeople, tell them not to expand the draft to include our daughters. we don't want them to be cannon fodder for these people getting rich off of these wars. thank you. host: albany, georgia, larry and the democrats line. hello there. i just want to say that i have

got to tell you, president biden is doing an excellent job for the 87 million people that voted for him. what is really going on is the president is dealing with the covid, he done saved millions of lives with covid right now. he is saving people from getting out of their homes, and all of this, he has to deal with afghanistan. now, with afghanistan, we know that donald trump made a deal with the taliban, and president biden had to go through with it. but then 87 million people who have been standing in line with biden, he is a real president that we can see and understand. this man has loyalty for the american people and the world, and he is the one for the united states. and i am proud that my grandbaby, 10 years old, can

look at president biden, as the grandfather of this nation, and know that he can go back and tell his teacher, he is 10 years old, "i saw the president on tv." guest: all right, larry -- host: all right, larry. we are talking about the withdrawal of afghanistan all program long here on "washington journal." next up, we will discuss with to veterans, who are also defense policy analysts, heritage foundation's james carafano and adam weinstein of the quincy institute for responsible statecraft. an hour-long discussion as we look at afghanistan continues here on "washington journal." ♪

>> this year marks the 20 than a verse or he of the september 11 attacks. join us for life covered from new york mud the pentagon, and shakes ville, pennsylvania, starting at 7:00 a.m. eastern, saturday, september 11. watch online at c-span.org or listen on the free c-span radio app. ♪ >> let your voices be heard with c-span's studentcam video competition. be part of the national competition by treating documentaries that answers the question -- how does the federal government impact your life? your five-minute or six-minute video will explore programs that affect you and your community. c-span will give $100,000 total prizes or you have a shot at the

grand prize of $500,000. for competition rules and more information on how to get started, visit our website at studentcam.org. ♪ host: with the u.s. military withdrawal from afghanistan now complete, we are joined next here on "washington journal" by

two military veterans and defense policy analysts. james carafano is a west point graduate and a 20-year army veteran who served as vice president the heritage foundation. adam weinstein is a research fellow and a marine veteran of afghanistan, serving there in 2012. he is with the quincy institute for responsible statecraft. gentlemen, welcome to "washington journal." james carafano, we will start with you and ask both of you this question. the question we have been asking our viewers this morning on the legacy of the afghan war. guest 1: legacies are interesting, but the purpose of statecraft, the question today, not only the last 20 years, what are you going to do to protect america's interests going forward? i think, what is important to

understand, is the purpose of america and afghanistan has changed over time, as this situation on the ground. the events of 9/11 really did not have much to do with why the u.s. forces were still in afghanistan. i think the two reasonable american interests, one is we did not wanted to become a terrorist sanctuary again, particularly a situation islamic terrorists that really had a global agenda of terrorism, focusing on destabilizing the middle east and on attacking the u.s. we saw that happen in the 1990's, when al qaeda built up infrastructure in afghanistan, and we saw it with the isis caliphate in iraq, we saw it in syria, we also saw efforts in libya. so i think not having, facilitating a terrorist things working but i could potentially be a threat to the united states

and friends and allies with legitimate interests, and i think generally, the stability of south asia is in the u.s. interest. india is an important u.s. partner, a free endo pacific is important. south asia is a part of that. i think the question is -- what are we doing to protect those interests going forward? and i think that is where the focus of the statecraft and policy debate ought to be. host: adam weinstein, an afghan bet of 2012, your feelings as an afghan bet, your legacy of the war and some of the things jim carafano talked about and what the united states is facing now that it is out of afghanistan. guest 2: i think the legacy of the intervention of the war has been one of failure. as time goes on, i think we will see support for withdrawal on the increase.

we already see it hovers around 58% in support of president biden's decision to withdrawal, which i will point out was a decision that president trump made. here we have two presidents who disagree with each other on most issues, but what they understood was that it was in the strategic interest to remove this conflict, and it is also what the american people wanted. i think they both have default on the nation in that respect. i agree with jim that it is important to have stability in south asia, pakistan, and in the. it is important to deal with the terrorism threats. but i do not think the intervention in afghanistan was a stabilizing factor. i think it destabilizing the region. ultimately, what presidents have to do is prioritize response to risk. is there risk to operating in afghanistan? sure. does that risk justify delivering young americans to the battlefield to be killed in what became an endless war, that

lasted an entire generation? no. host: jim carafano in terms of the way the war ended, the withdrawal, started in the trumpet administration, what were your views then and what are your views now? guest 1: i think we all agree -- and i know adam and i agree on this -- that u.s. forces should not be any places where they should not become aware they are not efficacious, where they don't advance america's interests. the question is what was the best way forward for afghanistan? this is where adam and i this agree, one, the efficaciousness of the american president, and i think poll numbers are interesting. i don't think they are current. and as a real concern of whether the popularity will remain, and actually declined significantly come over how we left afghanistan, and there was a question about how popular it

would be in the future if the consequences of leaving develop to do bad things, including terror attacks. so the assumption that the american people are with the president are with this i think is a very open question. so what was the alternative? we had 2.5 thousand troops in the country that had not taken a casualty in a year and a half. that had proven to be an effective deterrent against the taliban invading over running the country. it was costing afghanistan less than a week, and we used to spend in a year, and for that price -- here is where adam and i disagree -- i think our allies had enormous trust in us, in addition to not turning the country -- no analyst disagrees that it is going to become a terrorist actuary. everybody agrees on that. we were safeguarding the lives

of 38 million afghans. i am not a fan of nation building trade adam is not a fan of nationbuilding. nationbuilding, in this situation, was virtually impossible. having said that, in that instability, economic activity in afghanistan was actually growing. afghanistan was actually doing better economically than a lot of other countries on the planet. so the life of the average afghan was better. south asia was much more stable. ironically, afghanistan, the rights of women in afghanistan were better off than in most of the greater middle east. children could go to school. you had an entire generation of people that never lived under the rule of the taliban. now, i do not think we were there for nationbuilding. i think we were there in our own interests. but the fact is afghans were better off, whatever, 20 years

ago, the cost today was relatively. minor the situation was relatively stable. host: how long do you think that should have continued for, though? guest 1: i don't know. this is where i am a huge fan of what president trump had attempted, which was if you could no go sheet a process with the taliban in which you had real political integration and a stable security situation, then u.s. forces could have gone to zero. but i think the difference between the two plans were the trump plan was conditions-based on both security and political deliverables on the ground, and they were going to come out at the end of that process, not at the beginning. i think the biden decision was largely the withdrawal of u.s. forces, and "let's see what happens." host: adam weinstein, care to respond to jim carafano? guest 2: jim is the honest one,

who says he does not know how long we would have to stay in afghanistan. a lot of analysts were disingenuous, "just another six months," "just another year," and he has been honest. i disagree over whether the interests justify the cost. let's talk about the costs for a moment. it is true we did not have u.s. casualties for about a year and a half, but that is precisely because of the agreement president trump worked out with the taliban, which was an agreement to withdraw from afghanistan. if president biden had ripped up that agreement, you can believe that the surge in violence we saw in the last couple of months in which the taliban targeted the afghan military would have been directed at the u.s. military. s if we look at cost going back throughout the war, it is pretty high for the united states, in my view. 2448 deaths, not including the

marines, the sailor, and the u.s. soldier killed last week. we have hundreds of major amputees. these are people who will never have normal lives. these are americans who will have to live with the legacy of losing a leg or an arm, in some cases double amputees, quadruple amputees, and some cases, and they are going to have to live with that forever. so what were the costs? what was the cost between the u.s.-taliban agreement? in 2019, we had 23 k.i.a., we had 192 wounded in action. in 2020, we had 11 deaths, partly because the u.s.-taliban agreement came into action, you know, at the very beginning of the year, and, sure, without that agreement, we would have seen numbers closer to 23, 24. i think the question we have to ask ourselves is, is it acceptable for 24 flag-draped

caskets to be landing in dover airbase for a mission that most people agree is not sustainable land can't be dictated by military force? whatever flaws were enhanced by the u.s.-taliban agreement, that was a reflection of the fact that we did not have a partner in afghanistan that could stand on its own two feet. i commend the bravery of the afghan security forces, but the reality is this unfolded in a couple of months as soon as the u.s. government announced its withdrawal and began to implement it, before the last u.s. troops were out. i think if you go and you talk to americans on the streets and you say, is that is sustainable partner, is that something we can keep popping up indefinitely? i think the common sense answer is no. so what you agree with, jim, in the cities we saw incredible gains, we saw an increase in

literacy of girls -- although it still remains dismally low -- we saw and access to education, maternal health. i was briefly in helmund, and i was on missions in kandahar, the reality for a lot of afghans throughout the years is they lived in taliban country at night, and there was not a real government present, and they actually had to navigate between a brutal taliban insurgency and throw the crossfire of u.s. troops into the mix. the afghan people did suffer throughout this 20 years, and i think we have to remember that. host: let's make sure our viewers and listeners know our phone lines are open, if you would like to weigh in on the conversation. it is james carafano and adam weinstein on the end of the afghanistan war. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats.

and for independents and others, (202) 748-8002. and from afghan war vets, let's hear from you, (202) 748-8003. jim carafano, let me touch on the afghan collapse of the government as well where you surprised at how quickly those forces folded over the summer? guest 1: first, the overwhelming majority of combat deaths were afghans defending afghans. they took the overwhelming number of t's. so the argument that afghans would not fight for their people is simply not true, and regardless of how you felt about the corruption and the issues of security in afghanistan, the way they were before yesterday, i do

not think there is a credible person arguing that the people of afghanistan would be better under taliban rule. people are fleeing this country not because they are excited about the taliban coming back. many people feel a accidents from the country, and mass migration of people fleeing from the taliban rule. the taliban rule was brutal 20 years ago. when they come back, it will be just as brutal. i would disagree that the people of afghanistan's themselves did not agree that they were better off under the role of the taliban. they did fight for their country. they fought very hard. this was not a military defeat. there were very few battles. this was largely a political defeat. political leaders made a calculation that with the u.s. gone and the support gone and logistics and everything else, that fighting the taliban was going to be a failure.

it literally told the military units to stand down. i guess the irony here is we built the afghan military the way we did. we built it on a supposition that we were going to continue to support them. and then we didn't, and that military fell apart. well, of course it fell apart. it fell apart because we built it, not just american support, all of nato was there, it was built to be sustained with western support. why was anybody surprised that when the western support abandoned that, it fell apart? "why didn't we build a better military?" that is a fair question, but what kind of military did you want? remember, the taliban every day -- there was no invading army from pakistan. the taliban were they are. the taliban did come out at night, because they came out with money, they would say here,

and go right some people. so they would always respond to pakistan, and they could always come back. so what kind of military were you going to build that would protect the afghan people? and building one that was sustainable for a scenario when you could not going get the enemy, because they were always going into pakistan, and they could always come back to afghanistan and find someone to would take an afghani dollar and go and fight in american. you had a security force that was relatively robust and sustainable over time, and that was expensive. but that, again, would have been a very moderate cost. i think adam and i completely agree on this. getting out of afghanistan was the right thing to do, i think, if we would have done that in a way which would have been able to sustain the afghan security forces. you know, it might not have been a land of milk and honey, but it would have been real against the

expansion of the taliban in afghanistan. and the region will not be more stable. i think adam understands that. there's nobody, not an analyst in the world, that thanks south asia will be more stable now than it was a week ago. host: let me ask you both about the process of statecraft, a comment from if you are in wilmington, delaware sent this, "this agreement did not bind a nonsigning president." i will start with you, jim carafano, how this process with the biden administration picked up on what the trump administration did. your thoughts on the statecraft involved here. guest 1: well, the reason the evacuation unfolded the way it did is the u.s. gave away all of its levers on the front-end. it assumed the goodness of the taliban and then we just withdrew. in some ways, i am not critical about the military, because they had very few options, because we

took away all the real leverage. look, this is the hard power world that people live in, and we respect hard power, and when the united states withdrew all of its support for the military and all of its own military support forces, it had very little leverage over the taliban, and it will have very little leverage over the taliban in the future. host: adam weinstein, your thoughts on the process leading up to the withdrawal. guest 2: i think i need to qualify something. the fact that india did not fight in the final months does not reflect an endorsement for the taliban by the people. i think the majority of afghans believed in the republic. they were just not willing to die for the administration, which had become a corrupt administration. but i do not believe the war, which was only sustainable with 10,000 casualties per year, is something we should just shrug off. jim said it was isley correct, which is that this was not a military defeat of the afghan government, this was a political defeat, and that is exactly why

the u.s. military presence could not provide a solution for what was, at its core, a political problem. when you look at statecraft, the requirements on the u.s. side were very clear, and the requirement for what the taliban had to do were much murkier, that is an agreement the biden administration inherited. do i think the biden administration had at hand tight and had? to go through with the agreement not necessarily. but at the end of the day, it was a strategic agreement to withdrawal or lose more americans in this war, it was a tragedy, and we should determine what went wrong with this evacuation, but many hundreds of americans died before them, and i see the same level of oversight from u.s. congress.

we reflect what went wrong for 20 years of war. going forward, i think we will see the withdrawal decision as one of the best decisions that happened in this war, and that is going to be the legacy of this withdrawal. i think the american people are capable of understanding that the withdrawal was the right decision, but maybe the evacuation did not go as planned. and i think the american people understand that the dysfunction we saw in this evacuation over the last week is an extension of the dysfunction we saw over the last 20 years. host: our guest, adam weinstein, who is with the quincy institute of responsible statecraft, a marine veteran, 20 12, afghanistan, and james carafano, jim carafano the heritage foundation, a 25-year army veteran. let's go to your calls. we will hear first from wanda in new jersey, democrats line. caller: hi. good morning. , gentlemen. good morning to my beautiful

country. i am so grateful to have president biden as our leader to put an end to this senseless war that we cannot win. those people are totally different. they will never be westernized like our country. they hate us. they are the seed of ishmael, the seed of war. you will never, never change their minds! and look at their leaders. they took off and took the money with them, over $100 billion these people ran off with. the president of their country took off, but they want us to stay indefinitely? to do what? set up our own government there? host: all right, we will get a response. jim carafano, if you want to take that first. guest 1: i find that call quite racist. it is light brown lives don't matter and these people are

subhuman. i think adam and i agree. adam served in that country. yes, the government had flaws in it was corrupt, nobody is arguing that, but it was unelected government, as imperfect as the election was. what the afghan people needed, more than anything, was basic security, so their country would not be overrun by terrorists. let's be honest, that is the outcome that we got. host: do either of you think there should be any consequences for the president who fled, ashraf ghani, or any afghan officials who fled the country, and how would that be done? guest 1: absolutely. [laughs] as a criminal, he stole the money of afghanistan. of course he should be held accountable. host: adam weinstein, what are your thoughts? guest 2: i agree with most of what jim said. it is a wide brush, a very diverse society.

they did not want international war. i think the afghan government, at the senior level, was corrupt, and i think there should be consequences. the fact that they ran away i think speaks to the failure of nationbuilding, and that we can't change a country through the barrel of the gun. host: let's hear from dan and columbia, maryland, on the republican line. caller: yes, i want to first state that i may it vietnam veteran, infantry veteran. 20-year wars do not work. we had a one-day attack against our country, and we turned around and resulted with a 20-year war. it is ridiculous. same thing with vietnam, we just cannot continue putting troops all over the world and having extended, extended, extended nationbuilding type wars. sometimes our leadership has to smarten up and we have airpower

that can solve things really quick, a one-day attack from our country. host: all right, we will hear from kenneth in diamond, missouri. kenneth, go ahead. republican line. caller: good morning. i am a vietnam veteran, too. and it's apparent that we have to learn from history. you go back and do the same thing that you did in vietnam. the trouble is we got politicians that ron wars. we don't have the military running it. we have got politicians. that is the reason we lose all -- all the equipment we left and everything else, because politicians run the wars. we didn't learn nothing. thank you. host: either of you, what is your sense of the loss, in terms of just equipment alone, and what that might mean for future

security concerns for the u.s.? guest 1: adam, go ahead. guest 2: i think, in terms of security concerns, i am not as concerned as some folks are, because i simply do not think the taliban can maintain this equipment very well, at least not the sophisticated equipment, and they already have the unsophisticated equipment. i am not deeply concerned. they may coerce them to make a propaganda video, which they already have, but long-term, i do not think they are capable of maintaining this equipment. the bigger concern is to the u.s. taxpayer. it is painful to see how much money we spend on this war, depending on the methodology, it ranges from $1 trillion to $2 trillion. but whatever you believe in, whether you believe there should have been tax cuts for building schools, that is money that should have been in the pockets of american people. but in terms of security, i do

not think the taliban are capable of maintaining that equipment. host: jim carafano, what do you think the u.s. can do to protect home unsecured committal national security concerns about developing threats in afghanistan and in that region? guest 1: i want to, if i could, i think adam's answer was excellent. he goes back to the nationbuilding. nationbuilding is largely a myth. nations do not build other nations. nations build themselves. japan rebuilt japan. germany rebuilt germany. the marshall plan, those countries largely took responsibility and rebuilt their nations. it happened in austria and a number of other countries after world war ii. the difference is they weren't being invaded when they were trying to rebuild. and in a situation like south

vietnam and afghanistan, nationbuilding is a bit like sand castles. it is virtually impossible when you do not have a stable security situation, and the people cannot look after their own future. and i think we did waste a lot of money and afghanistan. i actually agree with adam, because nationbuilding is kind of a non sequitur effort. on the other hand, providing basic security was in the best interest of the afghan people, and it did make the region more stable. i think if we focus on that, which i think president trump had it exactly right. he skirt the cost in terms of human lives, casualties, and the money we were spending on the ground is something that was very, very small, and in comparison to the value we got for that, i think was a good deal. in the end, dealing with the taliban, and it led to political and security integration on the ground, it would have been truly worthy of a nobel peace prize.

so going forward, and, again, i know adam and i agree on this, our concern is america. i think there's a couple of things there. we would like to see problems before they are coming and stop them, particularly if we're not going to be, you know, occupying and having bases in place. right now, we don't have very good situational awareness of what is going on in afghanistan. we know al qaeda will be back. we know that because the haqqani network, which is a criminal terrorist organization which spans afghanistan and pakistan, they are routed -- they work closely with the pakistan intelligence services. they believe in the global terror campaign. they are the ones who insisted the taliban invite osama bin laden and the first place. the senior leadership is in iran, if you can believe that. the taliban may not be interested in another 9/11, but

people like the high connie network -- haqqani network are. i think adam and i would agree that the idea of the united states going around and flanking people with drone strikes now and again is both risky, not terribly humane, and not likely to significantly deal with this. how do we gain situational awareness, partnerships? i think the borders are a significant issue. the problem on the board are transnational cartels, not terrorists. if they are going to come, they will get on a weekend flight and come here, because terrorists like pretty debility, and they know what they will face could more than likely, they would just recruit somebody here to do something. i never looked at the southern border as a major national security threat. i think that has changed.

when you have literally millions of people crossing the border and it is unbelievably easy, and you have no idea who they are, if i were trying to bring terrorist assets into the united states, that is how i would walk in, frail bunch of reasons. we need security at the southern border, but national security is one of them. we need partnerships, and those partnerships are going to come, despite the people -- a lot of nations are disappointed in how we love and the lack of consultation and worrying about the cooperation. these will be the same people that worked with us before, countries like china and russia, they will not work with us on this. actually, they are happy if the terrorists come after us. i do not think they will be state ponders of terrorism, but they will be the same partners we had before. host: let's hear from edward in jersey city on the line. go ahead. caller: hi. good morning, everyone.

it has been a little while since i called into c-span. as far as afghanistan goes, i think it is a total waste of our resources. back in 2004, when i voted for the first time, i voted against george bush. i voted for john kerry, because i am against the war, against nationbuilding. everything mr. adam has to say, i am agreeing with. i had know idea what is going on at the heritage foundation. thank you very much. host: adam weinstein, you touch briefly on the cost of the afghanistan war appeared what are your concerns going forward about how that will affect u.s. military spending, u.s. social spending? guest 2: we have to learn the right lessons and learn that these protected interventions simply do not make sense for u.s. citizens. they don't make sense for our country. in most cases, they don't make sense for people we are trying

to help, even if the alternative is also bad. i am glad that we all agree that nationbuilding is not a productive use of our resources and young american lives. i think where we disagree is the idea that we can be involved in these boots on the ground, counterterrorism campaigns without them transitioning into nationbuilding. in the case of afghanistan, at least, because our partner was a corrupt government, and that is, by the way, not an indictment of the afghan security forces who fought bravely for the country, or regular afghans trying to serve their country, or even the lower level governments that it a lot at the provincial level, but at the senior levels of the afghan government, you are dealing with corruption. with that kind of partner, the mission could not be anything other than nationbuilding. if you look at the callers who have talked to us today, the vietnamvets who voted from

across the political spectrum, you cannot just stay in afghanistan with a low footprint , because it inevitably becomes a nationbuilding exercise. i do agree that leaving afghanistan increases the risk of terrorists using the country to engage in plots against the united states. we are not going to be able to generate the same level of human intelligence and having boots on the ground. again it comes down to priority. we are a country that faces many risks. americans are facing financial risks, pandemic risks. the violence we see in our country. there are terror threats that emanate from around the world. doesn't make sense to stay in afghanistan keep hemorrhaging our money and young american lives, whether it is hundreds per year or dozens per year, it is too many if it is for a mission that is unachievable. going forward, we will have to work with regional countries,

including china and russia, for that matter. i think the countries in the region, like pakistan, iran, russia, china, became very comfortable with the taliban slowly gaining territory, but the united states just spending tons of resources to try to keep the afghan government intact. and then basically getting to have their cake and eat it, too. they were supporting both their afghan government and the taliban at the same time, and we were paying the price. the party has ended, and now these regional countries are going to be faced with a taliban-let afghanistan, and al qaeda are certainly not fond of china and iran and russia, either. i think despite our differences with these regional countries, there is room for limited cooperation and intelligence sharing to address the most serious threats, like al qaeda, like isis-k. host: let's hear from nick in delray beach, florida, republican line. caller: good morning.

two quick points. the first is anyone who thinks this ashraf ghani guy will be brought to justice in any manner can forget about it. this guy is so in bed with the old obama administration and now the biden administration pure he was basically appointed by the obama administration, and a head professor from some left-wing american college. you can forget about him being brought to justice. this guy was buddies with antony blinken. host: your second point is? caller: there is a reason why may 1 was the target date to be out of afghanistan. it is because they're fighting season is in the summer months. they wanted everybody out before they could start fighting again, and there was a way you withdrawal. if you are in a burning

building, you don't withdrawal the firefighters first. host: ok, i will let you go and get a response from both of you. we will start with you, jim carafano. guest 1: i would like to go back to the point that out a maid because i think people are often, you know, argue that we always disagree, and i think that is exactly wrong. adamant i agree. the most important thing is -- what are america's interests? and then we have a legitimate, honest debate about those priorities and the best way to do that, and i think that is healthy and productive, and i think if we had more that in this country, and people were more engaged in national security and foreign policy and understood the fundamentals and basics, i think we would demand, actually, better policies than we get from the government. instead of saying look at jim and adam argue with each other, i think we are doing what we are supposed to do, which is having

on estimates good i enjoyed the last question. yeah, when the fighting season is really matters in afghanistan. you cannot fight in this country in midwinter. in afghanistan today, people say we ended the war, the war is not over. there is a resistance in afghanistan today. they are fighting. you know what they are trying to do right now? they are trying to live through the summer, because they know if they can get through the winter, there is no way the taliban can get them, and they will come back next fighting season, and they will take territory back from the taliban. looking at how things really go on the ground, that really matters, because the reality, when you are actually planning military operations, real politics, real people, what human beings are actually doing really matters. you sit back and wave your hand and ignore the map and ignore the reality on the ground and just make policy in washington, that is what gets people killed. host: adam weinstein, do you want to wait in? guest 2: i don't have anything

to add to that. it is true that the fighting season is spring and summer, and that is where the majority of casualties on all sides happen. i think the reasoning for the may deadline, the reason it was part of the truck-negotiated u.s.-taliban agreement might have had something to do with that. i guess we will never know what would have happened if we had left on that date, but i think what is clear is that if we had blown past that date without committing to a withdrawal -- we have to remove or what president biden did as he committed to a delayed withdrawal, and the taliban knew it was in their interest not to start a fight with u.s. troops on their way out. if president biden had said no, we will stay a little bit longer, u.s. troops would have been entangled in a very brutal fighting season, just like all of the fighting seasons have been brutal, and we would have seen u.s. casualties, and i think they would have been

higher than what we saw at the airport. but any casualty is a tragedy. guest 1: can i just disagree with that slightly? we only had 2500 troops there. they were not going to be fighting with the taliban. they had good force production. those 25 hundred troops are doing advise and assist missions. to launch a major offensive campaign would have been very, very difficult with what we had in the country, the ability to do that. i honestly disagree with you on this. i think president biden scared himself out of afghanistan. i think he believes he thought it would be a generic matter, and rather than worry about the 38 million afghans and the production of american interests, he just did not want to be the guy with the saigon moment, and he thought the way to do that with be to just leave as quickly as possible. but the problem with that is, as our last caller pointed out is, he took out all of the

capability to either support the afghan military or to do a sensible evacuation, and so we were left, essentially, with no leverage, no real military force to go on the ground, and that is what evacuation was a disaster. host: let me get back to the calls here. allen in new york city, independent line. caller: i would like to understand why america believes that they can lose a war by force. host: ok, we are going to move on to kim in iowa, democrats line. go ahead. caller: i agree with biden on withdrawing, and how he did it, it was not going to be pretty at all, because we have been there in afghanistan for over 21 years, since 2001. we had done the war, god bin laden, and then what we we trying to do? force our will on people, the

afghan people, and we did not ask them if they wanted to have western values. we need to start doing diplomacy around the world and stop spending our money, our money here. the other gentlemen who called here talking about lefty and righty and all that, we have got to clean up that mess here. host: did it feel, when you were in afghanistan, that the u.s. was trying to force its will, to use the caller's term? guest 2: i think that depends on which afghans you ask. again, this is a country of 38 million to 40 million people. in the rural areas, where there was a lot of fighting, i do not know if i would call it "forced its will," but what we basically did is afghans were held hostage by this protracted conflict between the taliban and the u.s. forces, and they were caught in the middle.

these are people who were just trying to eke out a living, and they were basically being forced to work with both sides, and they were victims of the crossfire. look, i disagree with the notion that we could have captured 2500 troops in afghanistan going forward had we not agreed to withdraw, because that number was a product of the u.s.-taliban agreement, and the low enforcement required for the production was a product of the fact that the taliban stopped engaging with u.s. troops. if we had stayed in an open-ended way, i think we would have assuredly seen the number going up. what would the casualties have been? who knows? i think it would have been one to many, but the number would have assuredly gone up. i think the american people reject any plan that leads to another 10 or 20 years of war. and i have not seen this argument from opponents of staying in afghanistan, whether using a low foot rent or just for going back through the surge

era, i have not seen a single argument on how it would have led to another decade of work it i have been a longtime's are of "washington journal," and i have to say, normally callers are much more divided on issues. but we have callers from all different backgrounds. what is the crux of what they are saying? we don't want to be there in any manner, and we have seen that consistently from today's caller s. the reality is the american people sometimes have a lot more common sense than our politicians on a lot of these issues. host: let's hear from john in illinois. caller: yes, we entered afghanistan because of 9/11, and 9/11 would not have happened were not for all the explosives set in the building.

host: that has been proven to be untrue. let's go to steve in new york city on the end. caller: hi. it appears that the united states and taliban have a common enemy, with isis and other groups in the country. do you have any thoughts on the future relationship between the taliban in the u.s., to work together to alleviate terrorism in the country and possibly build a longer-term relationship that can include trade and maybe an embassy in the near future, or even for future? host: thanks, steve. jim carafano, we will start with you. guest 1: that is a great question. it is very complicated. right now, i actually think isis-k -- so isis-k is an offshoot of isis. this is an organization, the caliphate that exploded in iraq and syria, which try to proliferate chapters all around the world, and isis-k is one of the. isis-k actually at times has

been hunted by the taliban, they have been hunted by pakistani military intelligence. they fundamentally believe in the global campaign. their goal is a long islamist caliphate that would cover a good portion of the earth, and governments, whether the pakistani government or the afghani government, get in the way of that, and governments that support and engage these countries, whether they are beijing or moscow or the united states, get in the way of that, so they are the enemy. but isis-k in afghanistan is not very strong. it is not a major threat to the united states. right now, i actually think they are kind of the useful idiots for the taliban. on the one hand, the taliban can use them as leverage for the united states, hey, look, you have to work with us. we are worried about this isis-k . but on the other hand, they are fine with isis-k attacking and killing americans, because they help chase us out of the country. once we are out of the country,

i do not think the taliban have much use for these guys. but there is a bigger threat, which is the haqqani network, which is, again, this rooted fundamentalist organization, which spans afghanistan and pakistan. they have both capability and influence with the taliban and with pakistani intelligence services. they have global design. they are going to consciously work to bring groups like al qaeda back to afghanistan, to reignite the global campaign. the taliban are not going to want to take them on, and isi is not going to want to take them on, so the pakistani intelligence service is going to be fine with this, as long as two things happen -- as long as they do not destabilize the pakistan government, and they are threatening india, pakistan intelligence services are fine with whoever they are. so they are fine with the isi, as long as they do not

intervene with pakistani war. and the china network does not care, because they do not affect the uighurs, and the chinese could care less. the russians could care less, because it has nothing to do with russia. no one really has a vested interest in curbing global transnational terrorism running wild in afghanistan. and i think the taliban feel pretty confident now that the way america left, the way nato got burned, nobody's going to try to come in and take the country away from them again. it is kind of the perfect scenario for this. host: adam weinstein, to the caller's question, what does the relationship look like, some of the broader issues, perhaps, the jim carafano addressed. guest 2: the relationship will

depend on the taliban and the united states. it is determined by both. the united states should maintain policy but diplomacy does not have to mean recognition. i think that is a mistake we often make in washington, the assumption that merely talking to an adversary is a legitimizing factor. perhaps it is to an extent, but if you look at how other countries operate, including china, they are talking to everyone, and it is not necessarily the same as granting legitimacy. if we are going to maintain our influence in the world, we have to be able to talk to people and maintain diplomacy, including advocacy. including isis-k, it is the perfect sample of the last 20 years of these interventions. isis rose out of the instability that existed in the middle east, partly due to the invasion of iraq, which i think most people agree was an unnecessary invasion. and then it's affiliate, isis-kp or isis-k, got a foothold in

afghanistan. this is precisely the type of terrorist group that u.s. troops on the ground could not stop to it i mean, we saw an attack on a school that killed dozens of schoolchildren in may, when there were still u.s. troops on the ground in kabul. the maid before that, we saw isis-k attack a maternity ward. there were over 8000 u.s. troops at that time. this is precisely the kind of terrorism that having the forever u.s. troops on the ground could not deal with. we so i strike the other day that was supposed to target isis-k, and it killed an afghan family instead. our intelligence was bad, even when we were on the ground. so i agree with the other guest that we should not engage in a drone war going forward, so i am glad to hear when he said that, because isis-k is precisely the kind of group that the u.s. presence, in some ways,

encouraged rather than discouraged. and i do think the taliban has an incentives to fight isis-k. when you look at other groups, like al qaeda, i think they also are targeting regional powers, even if their focus is not the united states. i disagree that countries like pakistan, iran, russia, and china don't have an interest in counterterrorism in afghanistan. there is a wild card here which has not been mentioned, which of the pakistani taliban, sometimes called the ptp. when they took over and released people out of prison, they released plenty of the ttp members, we do not hear about it on the media here, but almost on a weekly basis or every other week, pakistani soldiers are being killed by the ttp. this is a group that will target schools in pakistan. this is a group that has killed

chinese nationals in the last couple of months. this is a group that blew up the hotel where the chinese ambassador to pakistan was staying. so, yes, the chinese, the russians, the pakistanis do have an incentive to work on counterterrorism. it might not be precisely lined up with the united states' interests there, but there is room for cooperation. and if there is any lesson from the last 20 years, we have to remember that the united states cannot dictate interests to the rest of the world. every country have their own interests. it is the job of u.s. diplomats and u.s. presidents to find common ground, and that is what the biden administration is going to have to do going forward. host: we have about five minutes here. i want to make sure we get a couple more calls before we wrap up. baltimore, maryland, andrew go ahead. go ahead. , democrats line. caller: thanks for taking my call.

what happened to the u.s. policy of not negotiating with terrorists? has that been thrown out the door, and we don't do that anymore, and that is an old thing we used to do? as far as the previous administration, the president who plead with millions of dollars, what is going to be done to hold those people accountable? host: jim carafano, did you want to respond to that? guest 1: adam made a great point. all of these people are going to have to respond, and they're going to have to respond to them as much as the terrorists threat in their country. they could care less about global transnational terrorism threatening the united states or western allies, and they will close a blind eye and watch it happen, so they are not our partners, and they are not going to cooperate with us. the taliban is not going to be our partner, and we do not have any significant leverage over

the taliban. they are happy to take money. what are they going to use money for? exactly what adam said. they pay people to kill people and control other people. they do not need money for rebuilding schools, because that is not what they do. they are going to run the country like they did 20 years ago. the new taliban will be like the old taliban, just better on social media and the western press. we are going to have a situation, which is, and many ways, nablus to the wild west -- analogous to the wild west, and if we do what bill clinton did and try to raise cruise missiles or things from the side, we will fail in the same way if you die agree with adam, we should use diplomacy. we live in a hard power world, and people who want to kill you sometimes are just not interested in negotiating or taking foreign aid. host: to gary in pikeville,

kentucky on the republican line. go ahead. caller: yes, what i want to do is talk to them about no americans left behind. when you go back and obama was president, and biden was vice president, a deserter was traded for four of the top taliban leaders, who are in control today. now they leave americans behind, and how joe biden has changed on this policy, and their world several looking for him and trading for these four deserters out of guantánamo. that is my comment. host: thanks for that, gary. that earlier caller brought up this notion of not negotiating with terrorists. clearly we have had to use partners, to affect the

evacuation, the military and others, from afghanistan. guest 2: that is true. the united states has a history of talking to adversaries, including terrorists. if you look at history, we do talk to terrorists, and, in fact, talking to terrorists can be effective, in terms of disarming them. i agree that we need hard power. having a more restrained foreign policy is not just about disavowing hard power, but the balance has been out of whack for the last 20 years, and we need to be focusing a lot more on issues at home, and when it comes to issues abroad, we need to focus on diplomacy and the filament. yes, hard power will always have a place, but you cannot lead with hard power in most of these situations, and the same goes for talking to the taliban. look, i agree that the taliban ideology is as rigid and as rotten as it has ever been, and i guess we will have to wait and

see if they have learned any lessons over the past 20 years. but talking to a group in order to advance american interests is not the same as endorsing the group. host: i will get one more caller and give both of you the chance to give final comments. first we go to roy in montana on the independent line. caller: thank you. i think that the biggest problem the united states has had with afghanistan is that we go put ourselves in the position of of the taliban. we view them as terrorists. the taliban views themselves as fighting a holy war and that gives them extreme tenacity. they can hijack planes and fly them into trade centers and pentagons. they can strap on bombs and blow up people.

glorious resurrection in the next life. that is not the way we think. we do not put ourselves in their thought. it leads to a disadvantage because they remain relatively undefeatable. host: some final comments, james carafano? guest: we should use prudence and judgment and a mix of hard and soft power to advance america's interests. we agree on that and we should have a debate. it is important at this point that we have an independent, nonpartisan investigation on how we did this withdrawal from afghanistan so we can learn lessons from that going forward and understand the threats and challenges we have going forward and what is the right way to address them. guest: we should have an independent got nonpartisan investigation that includes the evacuation, which i agree had many flaws.

it should also include the wider legacy. i do nothing we can compartmentalize the evacuation from the rest of the war effort. it is the final chapter in 20 years of failures. a lot of decision-makers need to be asked to explain. going forward, we need to learn our lesson, which is that endless war does not work. saying just another six months does not work. the american people have rejected that. the american people understand that another six months meant another 10 years. that is why we saw two presidents who disagree on almost everything but understand the will of the american people was to leave these wars that had lasted a generation. i think policymakers should listen to that and also consider our strategic interests. that is going to require a repeal of a blank check for use of force abroad and require

congress to go back to doing what it is supposed to do, which is provide oversight and balances and checks -- checks and balances to the president and the military. i agree there should be an investigation. we need to look at the big picture. host: adam weinstein is an afghan war marine vet with the quincy institute for responsible statecraft. and james carafano, a 25 year army veteran might thank you both for your service. thank you for being with us on the washington journal this morning. more ahead here on washington journal. we will continue our conversation on the end of the afghanistan war, asking you about the legacy. what does it mean for the u.s. military in the future, for homeland security and what about afghanistan war vets? republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000.

for those of you who are independent or others, (202) 748-8002. and our line for afghan war vets is (202) 748-8003. ♪ >> we are at an important tipping point in this nation. what we do matters. i believe the 1776 project is an important historical moment. we need people to get behind us. we need to make sure our message reaches white, black, asian, hispanic, everyone. america is a great country and we need to fight for it. >> a former vassar and vice chair of president trump's -- professor and vice chair of president trump's 1776 commission.

join the conversation with your phone calls, facebook comments, texts, and tweets on book tv. >> c-spanshop.org is c-span's online store. browse to see what is new. your purchase will support our nonprofit operations and you have time to order the congressional directory. host: we are going to ask you about your thoughts on the legacy of the afghanistan war with u.s. troops now fully out of the country. the lines are, for republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000.

independents and others, (202) 748-8002. for afghan war vets, that line continues to be (202) 748-8003. political reporting this morning the i word looms. mccarthy faces pressure to go harder on biden on afghanistan. they write that as hard as kevin mccarthy has hammer to the white house over the u.s. withdrawal from afghanistan, he is under rising pressure to go further. the house minority leader peter lee pushed back on rank-and-file republicans who want to make a high-stakes call for impeaching biden over his handling of afghanistan, a balance that would come due should the gop take back the chamber next november. the house freedom caucus will hold a news conference on afghanistan. the minority leader himself held a briefing yesterday with reporters on the withdrawal from

afghanistan. here's what he had to say. [video clip] >> today i got a phone call from the secretary of defense saying the military is clearly out of afghanistan. -- completely out of afghanistan. there are still hundreds of americans left in afghanistan. before coming down here, i got a text from an american woman who had been beaten. she is back to her apartment. she called me to try to get out. the state department told her to go to the airport. the decision to leave americans there -- i questioned the secretary, what is the plan? what is the plan now to get americans out? we asked speaker pelosi to bring

us back in session. we have a response ability to the thousands of constituents we represent. this room consists mainly of veterans, those who have served the nation, and everyone who has served, i want to thank you for doing what was asked of you. to goldstar families, you will always be in our prayers. host: the legacy of the afghanistan war is our question. this is from the wall street journal. military mission ends, but the worry is back. he writes, as last week drew to a close, a senior state department official was asked whether afghanistan's new rulers have the willingness and capability to stop more terrorist strikes by the islamic state radicals who had just killed 13 american servicemen and women at the kabul airport.

the official replied the intent is there. the capacity is in question. in other words, it is likely the taliban rulers do want to stop islamic state fighters, who are their sworn enemies, from playing lethal trade on afghan soil, but the taliban's ability to make good on that promise is in question. that underscores the biggest irony of american withdrawal from afghanistan, the hope next thing the country that americans could finally forget about afghanistan. the reality is they now have to worry about it all over again. comments by text, (202) 748-8003 . this is from steve in ohio. he says, finally we are out, 10 years too late. let's double down on securing our own security.

let those arab countries regress back to chart -- tribal wars. thank god we can deal with china and the people concerned over the rising capabilities. don't we have 120 five plus cia operatives in the country? god bless our troops -- 125 plus cia operatives in the country? god bless our troops. trump's friend are to the taliban but president biden got us out. by way of the biggest airlift in history. for your information, he does not have to have a press conference when we want it. he will usually have it when he is ready. comments in text, (202) 748-8003 . we will get your calls and comments on afghanistan momentarily. we are joined next for an update from mississippi from representative michael guest of the third district in mississippi on the effect of

hurricane ida in your state and district. congressman guest, thanks for joining us. guest: thank you for having me on. host: the biggest news the rest of the country is here is the awful power outages, the flooding, and deaths from hurricane ida. what is it like specifically in mississippi? guest: louisiana took the brunt of the storm, so damage in mississippi was not as heavy as expected. we did have storm surge that caused flooding. we had a large amount of rain in some places, localized flash flooding, power outages, and some structural damage caused by wind. the last report i had, there were two deaths in mississippi, a road collapse that cause

fatalities and injured several others. in about an hour, i will be headed to south mississippi to tour some of the areas that were hit. meeting with me, elected officials as we begin the rebuilding process. we were very fortunate that this storm was not anywhere close to the damage we saw with katrina. mississippi was spared the brunt of the damage from ida. host: the hospitals in your state are already stressed with the increase in covid patients. has that been affected by the hurricane? guest: fortunately, it has not.

our hospitals were not forced to move any patients. the hospitals that did lose power had generators, so they were able to continue to operate at full capacity, so no reports i received specifically for mississippi for hurricane ida affecting our ability to provide health care to citizens. in louisiana, that is a different story from reports we are getting there. particularly in the new orleans area. louisiana, over one million homes lost power. in mississippi, it was around 125,000. we have been able to restore power to a number of homes. there are reports coming out a particularly new orleans seeing over a million homes and businesses without power and there are some places outside new orleans where it could be

six to eight weeks before power is restored. mississippi is trying to help our neighbor. we are sending resources, some of our national guard some of the supplies we had positioned thinking they would be needed, to louisiana as we help them try to rebuild from the damage they had from hurricane ida, which was more severe than in mississippi. host: what are you expecting in terms of assistance from the federal government after the storm? guest: there has already been a disaster declared, so fema will be able to reimburse counties for the cleanup effort as we talk about debris removal, trees , those sorts of things that are down. counties will and have crews out

there clearing the roads, so that would be probably a large part. there were a handful of shelters open during the storm and the federal government will help reimburse shelter costs and expenses. mississippi was spared the brunt of the storm. today i'm meeting with my mayors, county supervisors, sheriff's to make sure they have everything they need. if there are any specific needs met we will try to coordinate with our local officials and state officials to make sure we are meeting those needs, particularly toward the southern part of the state and then the central part of the state, as well as the northern part.

the damage was light after you got out of the first southern part of mississippi. host: we wish the best luck to you and your constituents. michael guest of the third district of mississippi. we will continue with your phone calls and comments on the legacy of the afghanistan war. we will go to georgia. thanks for waiting. go ahead with your comments. caller: i am sure the world and our allies are not pleased either. i think we need to change the constitution and put a clause for them to be hung. host: to philadelphia on our democrats line. this is steve.

caller: i would like to thank the military for their years of fighting against the taliban. i do have to say this. we left the afghan government with 360,000 troops, tanks, and everything and they decided to drop their weapons and leave and not fight for their independence. that was not the right thing to do. we have to stop limning ourselves for a country that don't want to fight for their independence. all we did was leave along with those troops. we have to stop blaming our government and our past presidents and marines should feel good about what they did for 20 years. thank you. host: to marshall in

brooksville, florida, republican line. caller: i am a former marine from vietnam. we never left anybody behind. i do not understand why we left them behind. we have always got the civilians out first and then the military. in this case, i would like to know how would everybody feel if it was their sons and daughters that was killed over there because of the way this happened. this should have never happened. it is not a saigon. we actually went in there and lifted people off the roof. we did not stop until we got everybody out. this president did not do that. he pulled out. he left people behind.

that is something the marine corps does not do. they do not leave anybody behind. in vietnam, we did not leave anybody behind. i know. i carried one out. it is a shame and disrespect for him to be looking at his watch when they came home with the bodies when he was there looking at his watch. that is disgusting and disrespectful. host: this is the lead opinion piece in the -- in usa today from the father of a captain in the u.s. army who was killed in afghanistan -- in iraq in 2004. the headline is parents of kabul heroes, you are our families. i will move this to read some of the opinion piece. he said, some have argued our foreign wars have been needless and without purpose.

while these debates have merit in a free and open society, i know the sacrifice of our fallen has provided a lasting legacy and direct support of our ideals. i was born in another country without the freedoms and opportunities we now enjoy. your life and voice were at the power of the -- at the mercy of the powerful. -- merit through hard work was rewarded. many in afghanistan today have experienced a generation of freedom because of the sacrifices of our military and their families. it is to them the military -- memory of freedom is owed. emery walks and speaks. a free afghanistan will remember. in the recent terrorist attack, 13 u.s. troops offer their all in service of others. our heroes sacrificed their all

at the altar of democracy, and they and their families will never be forgotten by a grateful nation. they are the best of our nation. their families must know the nation stands with them at this darkest time. in middletown, ohio, john on the independent line. good morning. you are on the air. >> i have a change of subject type thing. how did you come about to frame the question using the phrase afghanistan legacy? i do not understand what information you're trying to get at. is there a point you are trying to make? i do not understand the question. is it just a way to talk about something? why not just say what do you think about afghanistan? why use the word legacy? host: as we went into the

segment, i asked about additional things, the future of u.s. military engagement worldwide. what does it mean for our homeland security in the u.s.? what does it mean for afghanistan veterans? what is the aftermath of the war mean for all of that? it was an idea to get a broader sense from you on what the word itself means beyond the 20 years we put in there. caller: what about the word aftermath? what about the word consequence? host: we go through this almost every day. we work on phrasing a question or word and came up with legacy, but it is a good point you make. words do have meaning and i pretty you asking about the process of this. we talk about it usually the day before and the morning of and are we using the right words to ask the question.

we do not want to ask the same question the same way every time. that is an inside look at what we go through. scott is enough stan -- is an afghanistan vet. caller: to direct my comment to the caller previous, i do not think we are going to know what our legacy is for a number of years. our best chance to get anything positive out of this would be to -- there's a generation of afghani's who do not know life under the taliban. we have shown them perhaps a better way, certainly a more secure way. i think our best hope is for them to rise up and take over and bring about a new afghanistan. thank you. host: some comments on text. our line is (202) 748-8003. this is scott in kentucky, who says there is now a generation

of afghan citizens who know what life is like in a relatively safe country. every region has its own geopolitics in response to 9/11. if the u.s. had specifically targeted al qaeda or isis and left once the mission is complete, we perhaps would be in a different world. i would like to follow-up on a story we talked about yesterday about kids going back to school and the rise of the delta variant. this case in california and review by the cdc came up. this is the reporting of the new york times on that story my how the delta variant spread from a teacher to have her students. in unvaccinated elementary school teacher -- and unvaccinated elementary school teacher spread the virus to have the students in a classroom, feeding and operate that eventually infected 26 people according to a new report from

the centers for disease control and prevention. the study comes as school district across the country reopen and seems certain tight -- intensify the debate over vaccine mandates and schools. a handful of school districts have announced vaccine requirements for teachers and staff. in the classroom, rates of infection roughly corresponded to a seating chart. half the classroom in this california classroom, half of the students, were infected. all the dark spaces here are kids that tested positive for covid. glory is next in maryland. go ahead. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span and thank you for that last discussion. it was uplifting to hear people

speaking like americans. what i mean by that is even though they differed in opinion they gave respect. i believe the farther we distance ourselves from one of the most disruptive, divisive, disreputable period that this country experienced, we are going to learn to do that again. god bless this administration and the amazing families who should be lauded and praised for what they give. they gave their blood to keep safe some of these people with such loose lips. all they knew how to do is call names and criticize. i believe they have a plan. as a former member of the nsa, i

am confident they have a plan. america always has a plan. some of us need to join in praying for our nation to move forward rather than politicking for the next election. host: here is mike in louisiana. how are things in your part of louisiana this morning? caller: i was born and raised in south louisiana hearing people up there need some prayers. let me ask you a question. for the last 20 years, we fought this war. my brothers and sisters in this country have died. we have never once bombed the poppy fields. why is that? no one can answer that. i asked the same question.

in 20 years, we have never bombed poppy fields and we have had people die every day from heroin over dosages. -- overdoses. and we have never bombed poppy fields. host: to charlene in west virginia. democrats line. caller: this is my first time calling in. i have listened to this stuff for days now. my husband was a vietnam vet. he ended up dying from all that agent orange they spread over there. he suffered for years with that. whenever the saudi thing started , it was hard on him. i finally had to get him away from the tv. we send our kids over there to

fight for wars and they die. how can anybody say it is ok to keep our kids in these wars? as far as kevin mccarthy, i do not think he should say anything . he needs to clean his own backdoor. i know he has had a lot to do with that insurrection that happened at the capital. that is all i have to say. thank you for taking my call. host: president biden will speak to the nation this afternoon on the completion of the u.s. withdrawal from afghanistan coming up at 1:30 eastern. we will cover that live on c-span. you can follow that at c-span.org and on the free radio app. the opinion of the new york post on the withdrawal, joe biden brings a dishonorable end to america's longest war. the opinion writers say picture

president biden stealing a glance -- the picture of president biden stealing a glance at his watch says it all. fighting cannot deal with the reality of what he has wrought. he is desperate to move on. what a dishonorable end to america's longest war. from the new york post, we showed this at the start of the program. the photo shows the last u.s. service member departing afghanistan. that is the major general chris donahue, the commander of the u.s. 82nd airborne division, the last one out of afghanistan, picture taken yesterday. stan in colorado on the republican line, go ahead. caller: our military is very good at fighting wars. our state department is not good at building nations.

i was reading the agreement between the u.s. and the taliban . it basically said we are going to be out by early this year and biden extended it a little bit here and by and large during that time, there were no u.s. casualties. the taliban pretty much agreed to not kill us and we agreed not to kill them and that happened. but we had february 20 to plan all this over two administrations and nobody did anything particularly well. host: where do you think things went wrong? caller: once you agreed with the taliban in february 2020 that we were going to get out, we should have started planning then. we have a nation of 40 million.

the last election, not everyone voted. the taliban are 78,000 fighters, i think i read somewhere. by early february -- early january of 2021, the u.s. mostly under the trump administration had drawn down u.s. troops to 2500. i do not see what 2500 troops would do against whatever the taliban had. i guess on the bright side with all the military goods we left the taliban, they seem pretty good at killing isis. they will have good weapons to accomplish that. >> this is an opinion piece -- host: this is an opinion piece and the headline in the washington post is we are safer

from terrorism now. he writes that, when al qaeda launched its attacks in september 2001, it operated with near-complete impunity in afghanistan, although the taliban and al qaeda were not operationally linked to peer in the protection that al qaeda enjoyed allowed it to recruit and train operatives and deploy them around the world. at the same time, the united states and its allies were poorly positioned to address such threats individually and as a team. the u.s. counterterrorism community was unable to muster the resources to stop a relatively small group of committed plotters. two decades later, this picture is improved. the individual elements of the u.s. counterterrorism community are the most integrated part of the u.s. government. the result is a significant, worldwide network of allies that share information and coordinate

operations in a matter -- manner wholly different. -- but it presents a significantly less threatening problem than was once the case. in los angeles, this is lucille, democrats line. caller: perhaps it would be a good thing if we develop a precept and concept of we enter into war. every country has different value systems. ours is capitalism. in england, they believe in the kingdom. afghanistan, they fight for religion. we need to respect where the people are. go to them at what their

lifestyle is. you do not just go in and bombard them and rearrange their dishes and the way they discipline their children. don't do that. host: to youngsville, louisiana, tammy on the republican line. caller: my opinion is this was not a mistake. this was intentional. this was a way to arm the taliban. obama did the same thing. he armed the taliban. he left all our weapons there. i think impeachment is the answer -- i think treason is the answer. for all these military generals -- what is happening at our southern border, if that is not treason, what is it? host: let's hear from shane in

spokane, washington. on the independent line. not shane, alexander. caller: first, a quick comment. i was thrilled with your show yesterday. it was so professional, better than the networks. thank you. i think can burns -- ken burns -- host: the documentarian? caller: yes, an excellent one. he summed it up best on the vietnam war. we did not learn those lessons, a lot of it around the hubris of americans come upright or whatever. i was struck when we went into afghanistan, the looks on the people's faces, the fear.

it reminded me of the aftermath of my life. you look in the faces of the kids and see the terror. i saw a degree of that in afghanistan. that was a clue. i just thought i would mention that. host: thanks for calling in this is the dallas morning news and their opinion on the withdrawal. their focus is on those left behind. the cost of vets -- to vets leaving afghan partners behind. in the past two weeks, we have seen reports about the harm of america's withdrawal from afghanistan for women, journalists, and allies, but one group has not received much

attention, american veterans whose tours of duty have long since ended. it is likely to reopen emotional wounds for many of them. a program manager at the veterans affairs chaplain service says recent events have brought difficult memories to the front burner for many veterans. in california, larry is on the democrats line. caller: the legacy of afghanistan. the american people do not realize it, but we let 9/11 happen so we could go get the opioids, the oil, we could rearrange dod and invokes a patriot act. the american people do not seem too smart. the legacy is always going to be bad. we have nothing to offer. host: to fred in denver, colorado. caller: i enjoyed the

brainteaser question the man from ohio asked, why the legacy term was used rather than aftermath. in my mind, the terms aftermath and consequences are more immediate whereas legacy seems to indicate a projection over one or more generations, how the american government plots its foreign policy stance. i served in vietnam and i can see how the people have really become good american citizens. we are going to learn about the afghani's in some way or shape in the future, and i think the term legacy is an excellent choice. host: if you take yourself back to the end of the vietnam war, would it be hard to imagine the legacy of vietnam would be the

success of many veto minis -- vietnamese who came during the war and after? caller: when i was in vietnam, i was not thinking of those terms. now that i'm older, i can understand. prior to afghanistan -- to our entry into afghanistan, we had a policy that said we are not going to get involved in any foreign wars anymore. you're not going to do anymore nationbuilding -- we are not going to do anymore nationbuilding. that is a policy we had for a while. when afghanistan started, we started it cia infiltration. i think we are going to learn something in the next 10 to 20 years regarding foreign policy. host: we will hear next from

carol in texas. good morning. caller: i was going to say that americans today are more interested no matter what the crisis is in our country in name-calling and finding someone to blame. what i'm interested is to have someone -- in a staff someone comment on they did not come to our country. we went over there, many decades of oil and treasure, sending contractors to make money and get the oil. we always want to blame somebody else. usually people of a different caller for anything going on. people need to stop blaming everyone and look at our history and see way back how we got to where we are instead of a short look back from 9/11. go a lot further and see what

our part was in all of this. we went over there. they did not come over here. host: about 20 minutes left in the program. we will welcome your comments and thoughts on the legacy of the afghanistan war. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. for democrats, it is (202) 748-8000. independents and others, (202) 748-8002. if you are and afghanistan war vet, that line is (202) 748-8003 . we have played comments from kevin mccarthy earlier in this hour. this is a story about his family. kevin mccarthy's family benefited from u.s. programs for minority -- minorities based on disputed ancestry. kevin mccarthy's in-laws won contracts at u.s. military

installations and other properties in california based on a dubious claim of native american identity by mccarthy's brother-in-law. the prime contracts awarded three federal program were designed to help disadvantaged minorities mostly for construction projects at the naval air station in mccarthy's bakersfield district. vortex construction, whose principal owner is the brother of mccarthy's wife, received $7.6 million in no-bid and other prime federal contracts since 2000, the los angeles times found. the company is owned by mccarthy's mother-in-law and employed his father-in-law and sister-in-law. mccarthy's wife was a partner in vortex in the early 1990's. he said he was 1/8 cherokee. an examination cast doubt on that claim.

he is a member of a group called the northern cherokee nation, which has no federal or state recognition as a legitimate tribe. it is considered a fraud by leaders of tribes that have federal recognition, writes the los angeles times. here is charles in illinois. caller: i was reading an article in politico yesterday that said the pentagon new that the suicide bombing would probably happen at abbey gate but the article said the americans decided to keep the gate open longer to allow british allies to continue evacuating personnel based in a nearby hotel. that blast, because they did not

close that gate, a suicide bomber came in and killed 200 people, including 13 u.s. servicemen. john kirby was asked about that yesterday. we have had few leaks, other than under trump. there were leaks every day. biden has had very few leaks. he said we will not acknowledge any classified security leaks. milley apparently knew the bombing was coming that killed those servicemen. host: we had that reporter join us this morning. you can find that online. next, congressman troy carter joins us with the second district in louisiana. he is in the heart of the damage in new orleans. troy carter, are you on the air

with us? how are you? guest: we are trying to assess damage now. we were hit by a very big storm and the devastation throughout the state is pretty bad. some areas are worse than others. host: you have enough power to get a phone to call us, but what is the power situation where you are through the new orleans area? guest: the power is out in the metropolitan area. there are millions of people without power right now, so we are hopeful that the 18,000 linemen here in town and the state working on transmission lines -- it is going to be a while, just to manage expectations. this is not going to be an overnight fix.

it is going to take some time. as you know, the month of august in louisiana is very hot. we have rescue crews out as we speak with the national guard getting out to try to get to those people, particularly for senior citizens and children. we have crews out now assessing damages, setting devastation in various parts of the state to get people to safer ground. host: you mentioned the linemen coming into work on the power outage. what kind of help do you need most immediately from the federal government and people around the country? what do you think people can do? guest: the president signed the declaration of emergency, so federal funds are here. we have troops on the ground getting into communities for

search-and-rescue. the immediate needs -- need is comedic asian. the towers are down and most people do not have access to cellular lines that are working. they are working to get those lines working again. additionally, ice and water are important. the american red cross is delivering food. if people want to assist, i suggest they cordon eight through the american red cross. we have to be careful during these times of tragedy that scammers out there -- that there are scammers out there. only donate to legitimate organizations like the american red cross. host: i'm looking at a headline. ida rings habit, but the levees, much improved after hurricane

katrina six years ago. host: -- guest: 16 years ago. almost exactly to the day that ida hit as a category four. thank god the investments that were made 16 years ago to shore up our levees certainly made this not as bad as it could have been, albeit a bad. fortunately, given where -- where things are, we are better off than we could have been had the storms -- in the middle of the storms. host: it sounds a little busy there and i know it will be a busy and stressful day for you and your constituency. we appreciate you checking in

with us this morning and hope everything improves more quickly than expected. guest: thank you. there are a lot of things going on. thank you for your time and attention. anything people can do to help louisiana will be greatly appreciated. host: we have 10 more minutes or so of the program asking you about the afghanistan war and its aftermath and legacy. illinois is next, are democrats line. go ahead. caller: -- our democrats line. go ahead. caller: president biden has all kinds of assistance -- assistants to help them make a decision. i came through the vietnam war.

saigon, the vietnam was occupation and now they are saying the vietnam war and afghanistan -- a war or occupation? host: a similar sentiment from jeff on twitter. he says this. he says, the longest war that was never declared hearing in missouri, we hear from donna on the republican line. welcome. caller: hello? host: you're on the air. go ahead. caller: i have a question. joe biden -- final president trump made a deal or whatever -- i know president trump made a deal or whatever with the taliban but he had a plan. joe biden did not have a plan.

why would you pull your troops out before you get your people out? why would you put your troops back out again when they went back in and leave americans the hind? -- behind? i find him a traitor and a crime to humanity. it is the way he did it. he should have pulled them out, but not the way he did it. i want to know why. host: this is a piece from the new york times today, the international section. still broadcasting from afghanistan, but nervously. over the past two decades, an afghan broadcaster has been known for provocative programs like in which an animated super heroin uses martial arts to vanquish villains trying to shut down a girls' school. many -- millions have also tune into its racy turkish soap

operas and a reality show featuring female singers dancing energetically on afghanistan's version of american idol. since the taliban captured afghanistan's capital on august 15, tolo's usual lineup is being supplemented by educational programming about islamic morality. whether as many of pop music and feeble television hosts will survive in the taliban's new islamic emirate of afghanistan be a barometer of the insurgents ' tolerance for dissenting views and values. to be honest, i am surprised we are up and running, said the co-owner. we know what the taliban stands for. you can read more at nytimes.com . this is high rock, north carolina.

caller: i want you to open your history book to the beginning when we started this nation and killed the native people. genocide which we are still doing all over the world. we have not learned. would you please go back to history? go to fright lands in missouri and the blackfoot on the canadian border and american border. please look at the history of this country and say why you think you're so perfect. host: joe is on the line from tulsa, and he is on the republican line. caller: good morning. you are asking about the legacy of this war. i have an answer. this war was forced upon the american people.

i say that because there was no threat -- draft. there were no taxes raised. that means they were was funded by increasing the national debt, which is sneaky, so no one tried to stop the war over the money. it was set up to make tons of cash for war contractors. the worsening of all in my opinion is the war was not fought for american security but they legacy will be it was fought for israel. host: this is the comments from diana in pennsylvania, who says no legacy beyond the brutal ways corruption cost all and changes nothing for the better. here is david in maryland, democrats line. caller: i would like to say when

this treaty by president trump was drawn up and left out the afghanistan government, and we dealt directly with the taliban, which to me was a slap in the face to the afghanistan people, and the other thing is if you have no will to fight -- you can bring the horse to water, but you cannot make him drink. these people -- our democracy is different than what they are used to. they are a tribal country. it is probably very difficult for afghani's to fight against each other. just take a look at vietnam and

see similarities. you had the jungle, the mountains, these rebels fighting , and a lot of similarities. host: this is an opinion piece from the wall street journal by john bolton. russia and china eye a retreating u.s.. america's retreat from afghanistan is ending tragically and has sweeping strategic implications. one of the major -- one major misjudgment underlying the ending endless wars mantra was that withdrawing affected only afghanistan. the departure constitutes a major and regrettable u.s. strategic realignment. china and russia are already seeking to reap advantages. john bolton also writes in the near term responding to menaces and opportunities emanating from afghanistan, china will seek to

influence -- increases influence over pakistan. both will expand their middle east initiatives, often along with iran. there is little evidence that the white house is ready to respond to any of these threats. in maryland, thomas is calling on the republican line. caller: i am grateful i got in before the hour closed. i have been in iraq three times. i am a special forces and psychotherapist. i want to say that -- there is a quote. a centurion cares not for the policies of rome. professional soldiers know they are going to be the whims of the politicians above them. everybody who has fought in afghanistan has an internal sense of honor, whatever the final decision is made by the government.

that is part of our training as well. we have about 30,000 afghanistan ease -- afghanis in this country. why don't we find out what happened with the will to fight? let's go back to vietnam. there were incredible battles by the south vietnamese in the final defense of vietnam. the final point is this. they interviewed north vietnamese commanders following the war and said, what really got you about fighting the americans? they said, not the helicopters, not the guns. it was the phoenix project, a counterinsurgency program which basically, if you continued to operate against the south vietnamese government, you are or eliminated. we cannot continue to fight wars -- i know about the rules of

engagement -- where we are not willing to -- if you are not willing to rule, you're probably not going to do well. when the chinese go in there, they are not going to give a damn about the welfare of people. they are not a christian country. they are going to use their workers and do whatever it takes to protect their natural -- national interests. the idea that they can be morally shamed in or out of the country is not going to happen. my statement is the people that fought there as well as iraq fought with honor. the only way they can be dishonored is if they did -- they do to the police in this country, which is to suggest that they themselves are immoral . you not do this to the veterans of this war. -- do not do this to the veterans of this war. step up to the plate. we need to draft females. that will change the dialogue.

i have worked with many host: thank you for your service. thanks for all your calls this morning. i really appreciate it. we'll be back tomorrow morning of course at 7:00 a.m. eastern and hope you are, too. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2021] ♪ >> coming up this morning after a brief house performa, mccarthy will be joined to talk about the biden's administration to end the war in afghanistan and expected shortly after 11:30

eastern today. later, house freedom caucus members including texas congressman louie gomer weighs in on the evacuation of afghanistan at 12:30 eastern. and later, live coverage of president biden's address to the nation about the end of the war in afghanistan. the country's longest war. that is set for 1:30 p.m. eastern. you can watch his remarks live on c-span, live online at c-span. org or listen with the free c-span radio app. ♪ >> this year marks the 20th anniversary of the september 11 attacks. join us for live coverage from new york, the pentagon, and shanksville, pennsylvania, starting 7:00 a.m. eastern saturday, september 11 on

c-span. watch online at c pan. org or listen on the c-span radio app. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government and funded by these television companies and more, including media com. >> the world changed in an instant but mediacom was ready and we never slowed down. schools and businesses went virtual and we powered a new reality. because at media com we're built to keep you ahead. >> media com supports c-span as a public service along with these other television providers giving you a front row seat to democracy. host: we're joined next by lara seligmann, a defense reporter for politico as we look at this final day of u.s. efforts in afghanistan. lara seligmann, good morning.