host: continues. its a chance for you to call in on open forum in one of the stories we are following this morning in the wall street journal, nasa names crew to orbit moon in 2024 and that crew

was announced yesterday. bill nelson is the nasa administrator, the former administrator and former astronaut had this to say -- >> its a mission that is significant in many ways. its a demonstration of error ability to push the boundaries of human achievement. its a testament to the under -- the unwavering passion of the team that will make it possible. and it is a message to the world -- we choose to go back to the moon and then onto mars and we are going to do it together because, in the 21st century, nasa explores the cosmos with international partners. we will unlock new knowledge and understanding. we have always dreamed about

what more is ahead. why? because its in our dna. its part of us, to we are as adventurers, as explorers, at as frontier people. throughout history, humankind has gazed up at the celestial body, the moon, with wonder. host: nasa returning to the moon in 2024. open forum " here on washington journal" and first is louise, republican caller. caller: hello, i called about president trump. he must be the most honest man in the world because he's been indicted, he's been impeached. he is not creating the chaos. the news media and the democrats hand-in-hand are creating the

chaos. there is nothing chaotic about donald trump. its about the whole conglomerate of people that absolutely hate his love for the people. his respect for his country and they despise him for it. it is the globalists versus ordinary human beings. this guy is not creating the chaos, its being created by other people against him. i support president trump and i will vote for him and republicans can walk and chew gum at the same time. host: onto her democratic line, minnesota or caller is up next, good morning. caller: yes, i want to suggest

that trump lost the election and cut his fans in half. if he runs again, he will not congratulate the winner if he loses. he will be the same. he is his own worst enemy. he thinks he is jesus christ. i think, uh, the republicans who think of him, [indiscernible] host: pond to frank in fort lauderdale, its open forum. caller: i'd like to talk about the election for state supreme court in wisconsin today. judge dan kelly is running for

the state supreme court against a lady whose first name is janet but i forget her last name. she was or is a judge now in the lower court. i understand that she did not sentence a man who raved a young boy. he was convicted of the crime but she did not sentence him. that seems very strange to me. i wooden one anyone on the bench with that kind of belief. i would urge the people of wisconsin to vote for judge dan kelly for the state supreme court. host: here is the associated press reporting on that story

from their local station. crosby, texas on the democrats line, go ahead. caller: how are you doing this morning? host: doing great thanks. caller: i have five questions for the republicans.

when it comes to trump, i am a veteran and he talked about the goldstar family. he talked about mccain. he is talking about hillary. at the same time, it talks about when they found the laptop with hillary. when he talks to the christian part of republicans, he talks about repenting and he said he never has. he always wants to succor somebody and do something for him. he says the work is not at the quality so i will give you half. if you let people cheat you out of your business, they come at you. when it comes to people that try to overturn the election, you

have to deal with it out of new york city. republicans, think about what the man has done. he is facing criminal not civil charges and he has two more cases he's got to go through. biden can stay-at-home. i will vote for him one way or another. think about what trump has done and when it comes to the wall, his policy is still in place. they are keeping kids from their mama. host: next is republican line, its open forum, go ahead. caller: how are you all doing? what i want to say is that it seems like the lady should be

indicted for blackmailing and extorting money. michael cohen gave him the money and trump did not put any money in her hands. the american people need to realize that there is no guilty there, that was michael cohen. they should get her for extorting, trying to extort the president were michael collins because he gave her the money. the democrats are the ones being above the law. they impeach trump and they did go by the law. they had a kangaroo court and got the man indicted. they impeached him, they tried to impeach him twice. they say on tv that everyone had to look at that.

people need to open up their eyes whether you are a democrat or a republican or independent. they are the ones that are above the law. the democrats are. i ain't never in my lifetime, i'm 74 years old heard of anybody having a kangaroo court to indict mr. trump out of there. host: did is open forum. other news this morning from the political and legal seen in the state of maryland --

host: in washington dc, independent line. caller: i am so grateful for the indictment of -- [indiscernible]

and the department of justice. if we do not indict him, that will be a deep disgrace and i am grateful that things will come through to understand -- it must be upheld regardless of who is involved. thank you for all the service you have given to the nation. host: thanks for your call. kelly is next in jacksonville, north carolina. go ahead. you are on the air. democrats line. caller: can you very? -- can you hear me? host: yes. caller: the gentleman you had, daniel from yahoo! news, i disagree with him and he was saying the latest charge is not important.

he doesn't know what is in the 30 plus charges and he doesn't have any right to say anything on what trump will be charged with because we don't know. we may have 30 families -- felonies. trump has been a crook his whole life. all of this is catching up with him. he started being a crook, him and his dad -- did not want to rent to black people and he stole from the elderly. he has done crack -- tax from. --fraud. from university was sued. he sold -- he stole from his campaign funds. he was ok with them coming in with their weapons. he is a con artist and a sociopath.

he needs to be held accountable and all these people on right wing tvp to get educated and learn the truth -- tv need to get educated and learn the truth about donald j. trump. host: he will be arraigned in manhattan criminal court. we will be due -- bring you coverage this evening and the former president is expected to speak at mar-a-lago at 8:15 eastern. we will have reaction to it. your calls and comments and it will be on c-span and on c-span now and on c-span.org. this is jerry on the republican line. caller: yes. i had to sit and listen to the last person rambling. she needs to check her facts. the reason i called in is to say two things. one, trump, he always -- they

will all have to be indicted and he did not release his taxes but he went to the supreme court to make them release his taxes and when all the facts are out, they have to release their taxes this is a test game this eight checkers --. taxes. this is a test game -- chess game. this ain't checkers. host: -- caller: he is responsible for the pandemic, over 600,000 people losing their lives and he lied about it and said drink bleach or wait until april. it will be over with. with the derailment in ohio, trump, because of his deregulation, that is the

problem. he caused a lot of the mental facilities and i would like to say this to all of the blacks calling in. you need to top -- stopping -- stop being -- host: we will switch gears and we are joined next by frontline documentary producer and director correspondent martin smith and he is with us to talk about his latest film, the docuseries beginning tonight on pbs, "america and the taliban", which examines how the american 20 year investment in -- ended in taliban victory. that is next. ♪ >> listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio just

got easier. catch washington today for a fast-paced report of the stores of the day and listen to c-span every time. just tell your smart speaker, "play c-span radio." c-span, powered by cable. >> c-spanshop.org is c-span's online store. browse through our latest collection of c-span products, apparel, books, home decor, and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan, and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org. >> c-span now is a free mobile

app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington, live and on-demand. keep up with the day's biggest events with livestreamed floor proceedings from congress, white house events, the court, campaigns, and more from the world of politics. all at your fingertips. you can also stay current with the latest episodes of "washington journal" and find scheduling information for c-span's tv network and c-span radio, plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play. download it for free today. c-span now, your front row seat to washington anytime, anywhere. >> order your copy of the 118th congress. directory. it is your access to the federal government, with bio and contact information for every house and senate member, important information on congressional committees, the president's cabinet, federal agencies, and state governors.

scanhe code at the right to order your copy today. or go to c-span.org. it is $29.95, plus shipping and handling and every purchase helps to support our nonprofit operations. host: joining us as frontline producer and director martin smith whose new series debuts this evening, "america and the taliban", thank you for getting up early. guest: you're quite welcome. host: let me ask you, what did you set out to find in this return to afghanistan and putting together this series for pbs? guest: we consume our news in short clips here and there and it seemed to us a good idea to take a whole big look at the last 20 years and put everything in as much context as we could. once we saw those horrific

scenes in august of 2021, people rushing to the airport and people falling from the wings, we thought, let's go in and tell the story of this war and frontline gave us a big campus to do it on and the resources and the idea was to tell the story as completely as we could in three hours. host: how long did you get to spend back in the country? guest: i do remember the months will -- but we we were -- we were back there six weeks and not after the fall and we we -- fall in 2021 and we went back there in 2022 for another six weeks. we had two long trips in afghanistan and i have been covering them for several years so we had the materials we

gathered. host: from the vantage point of happening in 2021 and 2020 to come up what has changed significantly about the country since the departure of the united states, since the end of the war and the departure of the u.s.? guest: it is a good question but the first question i asked as i came in from the airport into kabul. it was, people told me, we are happy the war is over and the violence has decreased. we feel more secure. at the same time, most of them said to me they were not happy about that taliban rule, the restrictions, and it was a mixed bag. they were happy on the one hand, but they were uncertain about their future and where they were going under the taliban. host: can i also say that your

documentary, "america and the taliban", which debuts tonight on pbs, comes at a time, from my experience, the news and the reporting on the people of afghanistan, since the departure of the u.s., it becomes increasingly difficult to find out any information about what has happened in that country. pete: it is -- guest: it is and it is up riots state and has no friends -- a pariah state and has no friends. it has closed down quite a bit since we were there and after the fall of kabul, the taliban were gloating and they were happy about their victory. they have sacrificed many more lives than we did. they emerged victorious after 20 years and they were pleased to tell us their side of the story. when we we -- went back in 2022, they were less open.

they were less comfortable with the way things were going. what emerged and what was predictable was a split within the taliban. there had always been two major factions of the taliban even during the war years. so, those two factions were vying for control and had different ideas about what afghanistan should like -- look like going forward. that attention was there and it was a different country in 22 and 2021. host: one of the very moving pieces from the video in the documentaries, the visit to the pediatric ward and the children suffering from malnutrition, along -- part of a law -- long list of ailments in that country. guest: this is a poor country and even when the u.s. and nato

forces were running the show in afghanistan, there was starvation and malnutrition clinics packed with children. it is somewhat worse but it would be wrong to think that this is simply the result of the taliban takeover, although there are many signs of suffering you see around the country, as a people emerge from decades of war. host: martin smith is with us and he is the director and producer with frontline and their series tonight on pbs, "america and the taliban", along with his producer partner, reporting partner from afghanistan and our number if you would like to join the conversation, questions for martin smith will stop (202) 748-8001 -- martin smith. (202) 748-8001 is a line for republicans, democrats, (202) 748-8000 and independents and

others, (202) 748-8002. i will play out piece of video of you asking permission to cover part of the country you covered before but set this up for us because we see you in front of a group of taliban officials. what did it take to get to that point? guest: that is the governor in the mirror -- the middle that i am talking to. i have been in the province in southern afghanistan, a stronghold for the taliban through the 20 years of war and i had been with the approval of marines and we went to the furthest point south that any u.s. troops went and engaged with numerous skirmishes with the taliban and i talked to villagers down there and i wanted to go back and find the same villagers we spoke to. i needed permission and i was told i needed to go talk to the

governor. the governor walked into the room with an entourage of fellow taliban officials. i was there talking to him about -- generally talking about the state of things but also there to ask his permission to go. host: west take a look at that conversation. [video clip] >> we push onto home and province -- we push onto the prophets. -- prophets -- prophets --pro vince. ♪ >> there was heavy fighting here and much of the city was scarred. i made an appointment to meet with the governor. i needed permission to return to the areas we have visited years earlier.

the governor fought for many years to expel the foreigners. >> i would like to ask you what you believe are the reasons for your -- [speaking foreign language] >> eventually, i stared the conversation towards what i had come for, permission to have further south. we work in a town named [speaking foreign language] i showed the governor the scene of the villagers when we were following marines. our purpose of going down there is to meet the people we met an

understanding that history has to be told from two size --side s. [speaking foreign language] >> i think you --thank you. a day later, our group was granted permission. ♪ when we arrived, the local taliban were waiting for us. host: martin smith, i have to ask, i am not sure you are a poker player but i am not sure how you state so calm in the midst of a potentially dangerous situation meeting with taliban officials. guest: at they were to arrest

and hold me hostage for whatever reason, it would be -- it will bring heat on them. it is not something that i think they wanted to engage in. i felt pretty sure i was going to be left alone. you will never know if you are in the field if some younger talib doesn't know who you are and doesn't know the consequences if he messed with you but i think the officials, like the governor, don't want to get into controversy over holding an american. on the other hand, some reporters have fallen on hard luck and have been taken. i have covered afghanistan for a long time so you get somewhat accustomed to the risk you are taking. host: the longer version of the

clip, you speak with a person you had seen before, an older member who had no fear -- who had no fear of saying what he had to say even with the taliban present and their weapons. he says as he was speaking. guest: he said, " i am not afraid of the taliban. i am not afraid of you but only afraid of god. " i am here" to tell you that life is better --" i am here to tell you that life is better and the marines never helped us for the taliban hasn't helped us but we are glad the war is over." host: there are some intramural attacks in afghanistan, my correct? -- am i correct? guest: there are, there is an isis group making trouble in the northeast of the country and

there is a group of former soldiers who have come together to put up some resistance and they get down into kabul and put bombs around. there is violence going on but it is a lot less than it used to be. we were free to travel around the country for the most part. you had a scene with me asking permission but for the most part, we hired a driver and drove out of kabul and spoke with people. host: this series "america and the taliban" airing tonight at pbs at eastern -- 8 p.m. eastern. lots of calls for you. we will go to austin, texas. page. --paige. caller: i have watched all your documentaries on frontline and i

think they're great. i am looking forward to watching a documentary to might -- tonight. how do you get the access you get especially in countries like afghanistan and saudi arabia, where you have really good access to high-level people? i am wondering how you get that level of trust, especially for an american journalist. thank you. guest: thank you for your call and thank you for watching. i -- i have been at this for a long time and you make contacts. there is no one single method whereby you are able to gain access. i will say in afghanistan, we did not get all the axes i hoped at the highest level -- access i hope that the highest level. we did meet some but there were others i wanted to get to but we you -- but you depend on the

local producers you higher upon meditations you get from other journalists or people you meet in the country while you are there. you hire them and they have their own rolodex is of phone numbers -- rolodexes of phone numbers and you do what you can and it is a frustrating process and in the film, it looks like everyone we asked spoke to us but in fact, there are a lot of rejections. host: let's hear from isaac, independent line, woodbridge, virginia. caller: mi on their --am i on the air? host: yes you are. caller: how are you doing? for 1.5 years, the taliban is in power and it is clear that they are there to say --stay.

it is time -- is it time for the international community to recommend the taliban as a legitimate government? guest: that is a good question. right now, it is in prior -- it is a pariah state. they have had a lot of trains with pakistan that supported them --strains with pakistan that supported them. we have talked to them and money is going to the country but not through the government but to help humanitarian organizations in the country. the exact progress that has been made in the talks that are ongoing between u.s. representatives and the taliban is unknown to us. so, where we are in terms of getting to any kind of deal whereby we would recognize them and return -- in return for whatever we are asking for,

whether it is women's education or any other issues, is a little bit of a black box. i don't know where we are. at some point, i suppose we will recognize the taliban. perhaps it is time to examine that. host: let's hear from rahm -- ron from the democrats line. caller: back when the taliban were blowing up the statues in the 90's, i took to reading a little bit of history of afghanistan and it seemed to me that afghanistan was never really a cohesive country with a sense of nation. it is more cooperation -- conglomeration of tribes. can you speak to the history of afghanistan over the last 200 years?

that might give us a better idea of what we are dealing with. guest: what is important to understand that the taliban ever since group within that country, largely parts to --pashtun and they put together a government of them and others and their other groups and these are large ethnic groups, nationalities, that are vying for power and there has been more cohesiveness in afghanistan prior to the taliban or the russian invasion in the 1979. there was an era before that that the country was moving along a more democratic path,

where these groups were working together. now, the opposite is happening and the pashtuns are an amort -- minority group and they have control militarily. it is a good exercise to look at the history. i am not an expert on the last 200 years but in the 20th century, afghanistan has enjoyed some decades of relative cohesion amongst those various groups. host: what did you observe about the role in the rights of women in afghanistan since the departure of the united states? guest: the islamic emirates of afghanistan is an exercise in applying a very harsh

interpretation of islam. most would say it does not resemble as long to them -- islam to them. this is their experiment. it was tried in the 90's and 9/11 happened and they lost power and now they are back and they are showing no signs of any change since that first exercise in the 90's, weller -- where adulterers were stoned and people are -- had their hands chopped off for stealing and women's rights hardly existed. that is where we are now with the taliban. in terms of women's rights, women are not -- girls are not allowed to attend school after puberty and can go to university. they said they will change that

but we haven't seen that change yet and this is part of the divisions with the taliban. there are different branches in the taliban that have different views. women are not allowed to go outside without an excerpt -- escort. it is important to note the blue burqa that you see in mentor -- many pictures, but it is important to note in kabul and many cities, some of these edicts are issued and plastered on posters that you should cover in many -- cover if you are a woman but not all women obey that and not all women are arrested when they disobey. it is a mix. they can be arrested and harassed and they often are if they don't follow the rules. the taliban based in the south, the birthplace, of the movement have a strict interpretation.

they care about these restrictions more than they do about fixing roads or frisking -- opening hospitals. host: were you able to speak to women in afghanistan about their status? guest: we do that in the third hour of the series that airs on april 25. some of those were young girls, high school age. some were women activists. some have since left the country because they have had death threats against them. others are continuing bravely and defiantly to state in the country and resist. we talked to one women -- women --woman. we could not show her face and we did not have it in be documentary but she showed -- sold all her jewelry to eat.

she can't go out and she had the taliban visitor home and looking for her when she was not there. it is a grim situation and people don't know where the red lines are and where they might cross a redline and get in serious trouble. host: let's hear from caller: good morning, what's the current situation for the people in afghanistan who helped our military? did you have an opportunity to talk to them? what is it like on the ground? maybe you could give us a flavor of what exactly like there for the people who may be in danger who helped our military. guest: that's a very unhappy situation. we talked to people who worked with u.s. agencies as well as

the military. they dope fully understand often that you're a journalist in your role is to report and you are not running a relief agency. even today, we get emails throughout every week from people desperate to get out, fearing for their lives. there have been revenge killings of people who worked for the u.s. military or for any u.s. affiliated or nato affiliated agencies. that is a bad situation. if you talk to the high level tell about officials, they say we've granted amnesty and everything's fine. that is not the case on the ground with some commanders here or there who want to take revenge. they have.

i'm not sure if its the official policy at the highest level although i've had some people in a position to know say yeah it is the position of the highest level so its a confusing situation and there's good reason for people to fear and i feel very torn about my inability really to help all those people. there are tens of thousands of people who are trapped. host: we've got a little less than half an hour left with our guest martin smith. america and the taliban is the new documentary tonight at 10:00 p.m. on pbs. we welcome your questions and comments. i wanted to go back in time

because you included that news conference shortly after the u.s. invasion in afghanistan. it revealed the tell about -- tell a ban -- tell about - t aliban. [video clip] >> in late november, 2001 at a big hotel in germany, the un-sponsored a conference to determine who would rule the new afghanistan. >> we are putting the pressure on afghan delegates. >> the taliban were excluded. there were a whole slew of afghan participants invited from the northern alliance to past students and afghans tied to iran but no taliban.

>> was it ever considered for them to attend? >> not in my mind. i think the general feeling was they were defeated and they were out and we were going to try to do it as best we can with the groups you mentioned. it is customary in postwar situations to invite the vanquished to sit at the table to discuss the future. a decision is made not to invite the taliban. was that a mistake? >> it may have been too early because they had been quite defeated, there were pockets of resistance and they had gone in as the legitimate government. for many in the u.s., it was too early. >> by the end of the conference, hamid karzai, charismatic and

the speaking afghan politician with connection to the cia was chosen of afghanistan's new interim leader. some taliban leaders were looking to negotiate a deal, offered to surrender they could remain in afghanistan and live in dignity. host: they hindsight look of not including the taliban. did they use that through the years as one of their bargaining points against the united states and against the existing government of afghanistan of the time? guest: i dope know quite how they used it but i do know that they were embittered and it strengthened the hardliners within the group. had there been an opportunity for the taliban to have a seat at the table, it might have been an opportunity to quash some of

the hardliners and bring some cooperation to the postinvasion era. what's interesting is if you roll the clip further, you would get to general petraeus who is the commander of troops on the ground and before that he was at central command in a higher position. he said that's a very good question and he thinks that in his postmortem of the war, he sees the refusal to allow the taliban boys to have been a mistake. i was quite surprised by that. i did not expect that coming from him. and others who said that if there was ever a time when we could have reduced the violence

and made peace earlier, that would hit. once we refuse that, it was all war all the time in the years going forward. host: next up is ben from virginia, good morning. caller: good morning. i wanted to convey to you and all those who are listening today what great programming you have on the front line. when i hear you with research on international security and foreign affairs which is great in its just like c-span to convey to us a message and its unbelievable reporting. i am fascinated. i watch you over the years and i follow that closely. i also wanted to add if its

possible to possibly do a program on the root cause of the current conflict with china, explaining to the american people where its coming from? i believe its based on strategic companies more than all the rattling we hear from congress. then the people of this country could have a better feel for it. cute as -- kudos to you, rate programming based on your facts and findings. thank you, guys. guest: thank you very much. host: we will hear from frisco, texas on the independent line. caller: good morning, gentlemen. i'm calling to touch on a question the earlier caller from michigan asked about afghanistan

as a nation. one thing no one talks about in the media or certain circles is the current borders in asia, the colonial borders. i would like for mr. smith to look a little bit deeper. afghanistan has a 10,000 year old recorded history. there are over one million muslims over there in prison. these were all part of what was afghanistan before. pakistan did not exist. its a colonial border the british put in place. to some degree, i think the challenges that are facing that

region and today, every nation, every government and part of it is they dope learn from the mistakes of history and were doomed to repeat it. i think we should look a little bit at more layers before arriving at policies and strategies and implementing them. that is my comment and have a wonderful day. guest: thank you, i think you're absolutely correct. after 9/11, we were operating on a motion. the events of 9/11 and new york and washington had stirred americans to support an invasion of a country we really did and understand. there was an exchange with one u.s. official and a pakistani

official in the pakistani official said you have to understand our history in the u.s. official very high up in the state department answered, i'm sorry, sir, but for us, history begins today. that is one example of the sort of myopia that americans too often bring to the world stage, a sort of idealistic approach to things, thinking we can come in and turn a country around that has been unknown to us, country that has ousted the british twice in the russians once and now us3. it behooves us to understand better the situation. you are right, the borders are disputed on the border with pakistan is disputed and most

pashtuns live in pakistan. pakistan supported the pashtun taliban movement during the war and there are historical reasons for this. it behooves us to understand better the history and the context. what we tried to do in the series, we are not reaching back 200 years. i did not have 10 hours to do this. i had three so we are providing context for the last 20 years of our war. you are right, there is a lot in the history that informs this. the people there are much more conscious of their history then we would give them credit for. conversations you have with afghans will often range into these subjects, the vendettas that go back between the various groups. host: one of the more brutally

armored -- honest conversations you have in the u.s. is the conversation with one of the bomb makers responsible for the deaths of civilians, not just soldiers as you point out in the documentary. let's take a look at that. [video clip] >> i was the leader of an attack on foreigners. >> he was one of the akhani operatives. you made car bombs? >> yes. bomb vests. >> suicide vest. pete emphasized the ties to pakistan. >> you say the pakistan military was supporting the training that you received? >> it was in their international interest. at that time, they wanted to train the local government. >> so the local pakistanis were training you. >> at that time, that was their

initial interest. >> one of his biggest suicide attacks in downtown kabul in 2008. >> 40 people are dead after a car bomb tore the front off the embassy. >> they establish the pakistani spy service,the isi had helped the akhani network planned the attack. >> three civilians died. >> the americans also accuse him of the attack of the american embassy. >> the attack on the serena hotel? and these attacks inevitably kill civilians. >> yes. don think i am not in agony. >> i have a list of all the attacks that were mounted by the

telephone and the akhani network and i can share it with you. >> i done want to see that. >> a tele-band car bomb in kabul kills 10 civilians another bombing outside an afghan military base kills four afghans. in a span of a week, 24 americans are killed, 107 afghan civilians. >> but who is the target? >> if you go into a market and set up a car bomb, it will kill women and children and innocent civilians. host: martin smith, the person you're interviewing saying it sounds like this was collateral damage to the war. guest: yeah, but it was collateral damage that they knew they would inflict. as he says, this was fighting.

to the point of the first fellow , pakistan support for that taliban was key for their victory. it was basically that the pakistani spy service, the isi a very powerful branch of the military, really made the bet that americans would leave. that's a safe that, we work to stay there forever and they figured once the americans leave, they want a friendship with the tell about -- tell about - taliban who are likely to take over. they threw in their lot with the tele-band - taliban and although they were a u.s. ally, they were assisting in the does -- a duplicitous fashion to help their friend, the united

states'enemy. its a very complicated situation but it speaks to the history. the pashtun population in pakistan is quite large and they could go up against pashtun nationalism in their country or afghanistan. host: did the isi ever admit they were eating the afghans ? >> we did go to pakistan for this project but i been there in the past and officials have admitted that yes, we support the taliban. they dole like to do that on camera but they will tell you that privately. host: let's hear from angela from west palm beach florida. caller: good morning, i have an observation and a question. my observation is based on experience of maysan who was a

commander in afghanistan. a lot that i know about what was on there because i wanted to pay attention having a family member there. its been extremely painful for my sun and other military members, not to mention those injured and killed to see what happened and see how these actions went. in case people are starting to forget were not aware, what that must've been like for people like maysan -- my sun. they tried to get the local government going and had some progress in of course, no its all disappeared. my question goes back to your comments about general petraeus

stating that the television should at -- the taliban should have been at the table. as her history teacher, are we learning from history? are we doomed to repeat it? do we had the capability in our government, the experts, the information to understand nations and people and issues better? my sun had years of training before he went to afghanistan where he learned the language and a lot about the people and realized when he got there important issues had not been covered. how are we doing in educating our nations decision-makers? host: thank you for your question and your sons service. guest: thank you very much for those points about the people that served in afghanistan, many of whom i got to know and was

embedded with marines in the south and the u.s. army east of afghanistan. many of them were frustrated by the mission they were sent on. they increasingly saw it as an impossible mission that was very hard for them and many of them gave their lives for what turned out to be, i do think you can say it any other way but a disaster in terms of our investment there, trillions of dollars. i don think we are doing very well. as i said earlier, we rushed into this war after 9/11 on an emotional binge and took out thetaliban. the u.s. military can do that kind of thing very easily.

then what? i think there are people in washington, people in the u.s. who study countries like iraq and afghanistan and know a lot. i met with these people and they often have an office in the basement of some office building in washington. but they know a lot about what's going on but that's different than the people at the top that our politicians who down have a special expertise in what's going on in this country. it behooves them to listen to the resources and tap the resources they have. we were in a rush. we had the idea that we could instill this country with western values which i think was a nation build place we understood little about and i think that is where we got lost.

we wandered into this war, we rushed into this war and then we lost our sense of mission. once the initial mission was to take out al qaeda and take out bin laden and that was achieved and we kept on with the kind of nation building approach that really did have much of a chance of working in afghanistan for many different reasons. host: you pointed out the trillions of dollars spent with the ongoing story and tracking of that money is noah $2.3 trillion worth of spending between 2001 and 2021 and two billions -- and to be in dollars of that is veterans care. we had a special inspector general for afghanistan reached read -- reconstruction and every time it was about the latest amount of money being overspent on afghanistan or misspent in

afghanistan. on the money alone, why do you think the message was not perceived that we seemed to be frittering away money in afghanistan? guest: the 2.5 trillion or whatever it is is only part of the story because we borrowed money through bonds, treasury sales to pay for the war and by the time we pay off the interest of the $2 trillion, estimates are that we will be up toward seven or $8 trillion over the next several decades. its an enormous amount of money. we thought we could build a western-style democracy there and there were many afghans who returned to the country who believed in that same mission. but it was, in my view, impossible as long as pakistan

was supporting the taliban and giving them sanctuary. as long as they had a legitimacy in the countryside among people, for those afghans in the cities to really be able to ground the kind of institutions and reforms they needed to in order to establish a working government. by the time -- obama started to wind down the war and when trump comes in, he is in a rush to get a deal with the taliban, a lot in that deal, there was a lot given to the taliban for nothing really in return from them. president biden stuck with that deal and it all leads to an extremely messy and heartbreaking scene we saw at the airport with people falling off of wings of airplanes as

they tried desperately to get out of the country. host: couple of more calls, marion and chester, virginia. caller: i am a veteran. i was fortunate enough to be married to two 82nd airborne and one buffalo soldier. my question is, why did we have so much equipment in afghanistan to begin with? was it plans to leave it there for the taliban? there was enough there to supply a whole division or more. the 82nd airborne never had that much equipment so why was it not taken out and why was it there in the first place? with all the money we spent in

afghanistan, are we not doing the same thing in ukraine? we are putting money in their with and admission there is no accountability. are we covering up for another failing? this has been happening too much in our military actions and i am thoroughly convinced at this point that after 400 years, our military service in my family, i would not recommend one of my children to go into the military now. host: thanks for your comments. guest: that's a powerful comment, i appreciate your call. the idea here was that the afghans, once we departed, the afghan government we backed with its police and military forces was to take much of that equipment and use it to provide security. they would provide that to the

fledgling afghan state that was fighting the taliban. that did happen. the rush to the exits that happened in august of 21 took most people by surprise. that the taliban strength was such that they could roll in. you will see in the third hour of the series that it should not have been much of a surprise. the taliban were steadily gaining ground and we were not moving to remove all that equipment. the idea was that much of that was going to stay and be used by the afghans. it did happen that way. host: let's hear from leo in arkansas, democrats line, go ahead. caller: hello. thank you very much. we are talking about history here and peace and war. in current history, there has been 35+ years of peace corps

volunteers living in afghanistan. there has been professors in the peace corps and they learned to speak afghani for 23 years and there was hundreds of these people. some of them down thank in political levels. they think its -- they think at social levels. they talk to people and plant crops. there might be a little bit of money here and there but we do not currently [indiscernible] people that have the idea of peace, we sort of look at this armageddon thing. afghanistan probably, i'm not an expert, lives between war and peace forever. have you spoken with any x peace corps volunteers who are knowledgeable?

thank you very much. guest: i have spoken to people on provincial reconstruction teams and spoken to people who worked there. they work for various nongovernmental organizations working to help farmers and working to help install pumps in remote villages so they can have water. all of these people with a great deal of expertise working hard for peace were targets for the taliban. the taliban knew they had to pack away at these various teams of people and it made it hard for there to be steady progress. the whole idea that was initially instituted under president obama was to send in

troops and have them execute a policy of counterinsurgency was to clear areas of the taliban, hold onto them and build resources whether it be clinics, schools, farming, administration. there are various sorts of things that would make people's lives better. and then connect to a central government that we backed. that did work very well. the central government was rife with corruption and it was very hard for the u.s. soldiers or marines to hold on to these places so they could be protected while building was going on. the whole project under the banner of counterinsurgency didn't work. host: