to a safe haven in afghanistan. it was called that by the american military who witnessed it. it's obvious that this is one of the problems when you use words like taliban, you know, it's kind of this uniformed word, and everybody assumes it means the same thing. it doesn't. there are obviously those who are part of the power structure with possibly working directly with the pakistani intelligence or in some way empowered, and then you probably have the average, you know, afghans or even, you know, other people from other countries or men from other countries who have no particular power at all, so, you know, there's a hire hierarchy within the structure that needs to be appreciated. >> how can we assume they are evil? >> the air lift of evil means they removed the fighters off the ground in afghanistan. >> america's allies were basically assisting the enemy in ease keeping from csh escaping from the battle and from being captured without explanation, and american soldiers were told to stand down and not interfere w

we get to afghanistan, and they send their top moscow guy down on afghanistan, talks to roger. roger is shocked to tell us, they the to get out. they want to get out really quickly, and they are desperate, and we bring the story back tonightline, and it was obvious that the mainstream media and beltway crowd was not interested in doing anything with this possibility. they didn't actually create what roominger described as the golden bridge to help soviets withdraw and stay safe. they wanted to leave that and not look like it was a defeat base cle. that's number one. well, charlie starts to get his project going to increase funding after that point. the exact -- what needed to happen was the insurgency had to stop from pakistan and what wilson did was increase the insurgency. if that had stopped, the president had said on camera to us that the soviets would leave, so these are all the his -- this is part of the historical record. what charlie was doing was actually increasing the chances of the soviets staying there longer, and that actually was the goal of the whole idea was to

for afghanistan any time soon. the most likely future of the next two years is some form of a messy stalemate. the afghanistan characterized by a mix of the government, strong local officials, and a taliban presence supported out of pakistan that will be extensive in must of the pashtun south and east of afghanistan. resolution by either military or diplomatic means is unlikely and continue constitute as a basis. walking away from afghanistan is not the answer. the country should scale back what we are doing and what we seek to accomplish. and aim for an afghanistan that is simply good enough in light of local realities, limited interest, and the broad range of domestic and global challenges now facing the united states. thank you very much. >> thank you very much, dr. haass. very comprehensive and i think appropriately provocative and thoughtful as always. we look forward to following up. dr. slaughter. by the way, welcome back. i don't know if you know it, dr. slaughter was an intern here in 1979. by persistence,

for afghanistan any time soon. the most likely future of the next two years is some form of a messy stalemate. the afghanistan characterized by a mix of the government, strong local officials, and a taliban presence supported out of pakistan that will be extensive in must of the pashtun south and east of afghanistan. resolution by either military or diplomatic means is unlikely and continue constitute as a basis. walking away from afghanistan is not the answer. the country should scale back what we are doing and what we seek to accomplish. and aim for an afghanistan that is simply good enough in light of local realities, limited interest, and the broad range of domestic and global challenges now facing the united states. thank you very much. >> thank you very much, dr. haass. very comprehensive and i think appropriately provocative and thoughtful as always. we look forward to following up. dr. slaughter. by the way, welcome back. i don't know if you know it, dr. slaughter was an intern here in 1979. by persistence,

for afghanistan any time soon. the most likely future of the next two years is some form of a messy stalemate. the afghanistan characterized by a mix of the government, strong local officials, and a taliban presence supported out of pakistan that will be extensive in must of the pashtun south and east of afghanistan. resolution by either military or diplomatic means is unlikely and continue constitute as a basis. walking away from afghanistan is not the answer. the country should scale back what we are doing and what we seek to accomplish. and aim for an afghanistan that is simply good enough in light of local realities, limited interest, and the broad range of domestic and global challenges now facing the united states. thank you very much. >> thank you very much, dr. haass. very comprehensive and i think appropriately provocative and thoughtful as always. we look forward to following up. dr. slaughter. by the way, welcome back. i don't know if you know it, dr. slaughter was an intern here in 1979. by persistence,

yes absolutely afghanistan. is a very contentious issue between the united states and pakistan as and i mentioned before the united states and pakistan have conflicting interests in afghanistan. the taliban and its associated are the enemies of americans and the afghan government while they are supported by certain circles within the pakistani establishment this year two thousand and seven will be a very critical year. in july the obama administration is planning to a draw. begin withdrawal of troops from the camp three and also it is the beginning of transition of security responsibilities to security forces. have to have been allowed in scaling now the critical software here in the united states as well they're there they're trying to convince and ministration to call it mission accomplished. leave afghanistan but i think that'll be very much huge mistake because i've been alarmed and it's gone but the terror infrastructure and the ideology is still there as we saw the taliban announces july first spring offen

war in afghanistan. stephen biddle is a senior fellow for defense policy at the council on foreign relations. an expert in defense policy and strategy. gentlemen, we look forward to your help in addressing many of the questions i have just posed. senator lugar. >> mr. chairman, i join you in welcoming our distinguished witnesses and we look forward to a very important hearing with them. afghanistan has been important and to still be a source of threat to the united states security. on that we are all agreed. the question before us is whether afghanistan is important enough to justify the lives, the massive resources that are being spent their, especially given our nation's debt crisis, or can we achieve the most important national security goals in afghanistan essentially preventing the taliban from taking over the government, and preventing afghan territory from being used as a terrorist safe haven at far less expense? at our first hearing on afghanistan last week, i offered four observations as a prelu

for afghanistan any time soon.the most likely future of the next two years is some form of a messy stalemate. the afghanistan characterized by a mix of the government, strong local officials, and a taliban presence supported out of pakistan that will be extensive in must of the pashtun south and east of afghanistan. resolution by either military or diplomatic means is unlikely and continue constitute as a basis. walking away from afghanistan is not the answer. the country should scale back what we are doing and what we seek to accomplish. and aim for an afghanistan that is simply good enough in light of local realities, limited interest, and the broad range of domestic and global challenges now facing the united states. thank you very much. >> thank you very much, dr. haass. very comprehensive and i think appropriately provocative and thoughtful as always. we look forward to following up. dr. slaughter. by the way, welcome back. i don't know if you know it, dr. slaughter was an intern here in 1979. by persistence,

if our goal and afghanistan as dr. slaughter said and i think you just said is to prevent terrorist attacks on the united states, why are we limiting this to afghanistan? aren't there other countries in the middle east but also harboring terrorists, which until on the united states? are in their countries in africa? so, why have we drawn the line here and say we will stay as long as necessary to reach a good enough solution in afghanistan? >> it is actually the same approach that i will suggest to the other countries. what i'm trying to do, it must be a drafting problem and i wasn't clear. i am trying to scale down dramatically the u.s. involvement and investment in afghanistan, much more akin to what we have been doing in other countries like yemen and somalia. i want the emphasis to be on counterterrorism, a degree of training but i agree with you i don't believe coming up with something senator corker said before you are right, this is not a template that sustainable i don't believe it is a template of to be sustain

strategy in afghanistan i'm joined by bradley blakeman in washington he's a former member of george w. bush's senior staff and currently a professor at georgetown university and in islam about because the shop i view is a risk and security analyst all right gentlemen crosstalk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want but first let's take a look at some of the issues and opportunities facing president barack obama when it comes to afghanistan. more than a week following the killing of al qaeda leader osama bin laden the question that is gathering steam is whether the u.s. will now change its war on terror strategy a decade of chasing the specter of bin laden has marred the u.s. in a war against an enemy that is state less and it seems ubiquitous without gracious and afghanistan iraq pakistan and yemen the cost of the war on terror and mounts to a staggering three trillion dollars the death toll is the call to estimates but hundreds of thousands of afghans iraqis and pakistani civilians are believed to have lost their lives and most of all we're making progress in our

policy in afghanistan is said to be transformed following the killing of our top terrorist. located welcome to crossfire nine people about with the killing of osama bin laden u.s. president barack obama has an historic opportunity on afghanistan will he use it and what is the downside if he doesn't. across the u.s. strategy in afghanistan i'm joined by bradley blakeman in washington he's a former member of george w. bush's senior staff and currently a professor at georgetown university and in islamabad because the shock i could hear is a risk in security analyst all right gentlemen crosstalk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want but first let's take a look at some of the issues and opportunities facing president barack obama when it comes to afghanistan. more than the week following the killing of al qaeda or leader of some of bin laden the question that is gathering steam is whether the u.s. will now change its war on terror strategy a decade of chasing the specter of the loddon has marred the u.s. in a war against an enemy that is stateless and it see

half years on the war in afghanistan has grown visibly worse while u.s. rhetoric surrounding it has consistently spun in circles we are making progress that is workers enabled us to make the progress that we have made i think it's possible that by the end of this year the war. since two thousand and three washington has repeatedly per cleaned turning points for a conflict that critics call our failing quagmire the reality is that things are still mean that things are worse than they were this time last year every year we send more troops every year as we spend more money and the insurgency grows and size karzai government gets weaker and the violence gets worse and nearly fifteen hundred u.s. soldiers and ten thousand afghan civilians have been killed in a war costing america two billion dollars per week meanwhile after sasson aiding a man it's been hunting since two thousand and one the united states has conducted an operation that killed osama bin laden i disconnect between what the us says and what the world sees may have deeper a defining moment in th

gentlemen i'd like to stay with afghanistan but i think that's news bradley i'd. like to ask you you know we've been this is ten years going on the united states has been in afghanistan for ten years and its coalition of the willing that is dwindling all the time i mean it looks to me you know the insurgency is just it can afford to wait it out ok i mean the united states is i mean i was reading an interesting article coming from a military source u.s. military source just today he said there's such a psychological fatigue of the military after ten years these were these people didn't expect to be there for a decade ok and take that's taking its toll as well i mean what my point is is that if you don't make a pretty negotiated deal pretty soon on terms that are appealing to the people on the ground it doesn't matter the united states will just be bled dry over just a year after year tens of billions of dollars i agree there are now. there is fatigue and there's a question as to what the end game is sooner or later the pakistanis and the afghanis have got to stand

war strategy in the country in afghanistan here's his response. the last reasonable sounding rationale for the war in afghanistan is now evaporated i mean president obama said that his job one is for security goes was attacking al qaeda and al qaida is largely driven out of afghanistan almost completely and bin laden is dead there's no reasonable rationale left for the afghanistan war and what matthew hoh said in your clip before is absolutely sure every year the war in afghanistan continues to go worse from a strategic standpoint for the united states and so it's like the rationale that it was legitimate before bin laden was dead was dead and now that he's gone there's no reason to keep troops there ok let's follow the three that the u.s. pulled out of taliban or gain control you're making strategically this is getting worse and worse favre can't control the country are you ok with that well i think the problem in afghanistan is that there's this idea that the taliban will just overrun the entire territory of afghanistan retake kabul it'll be jus

is in a much better condition afghanistan has an infrastructure afghanistan has a parliament has had two presidential elections but at the same time i think there's much more that could be done in this regard. many people and you of course read it here that it say that the have their government is. an efficient and corrupt is it true and there what in your opinion should be done to make it more efficient and less correct look it's understandable for people to criticize the afghan government because of corruption but you worked what is specifically important for people to realize is that they're different levels of corruption there's corruption in the afghan government but at the same time there's a very serious corruption in the international community which also has to be addressed and also corruption particularly could be addressed with by systematic procedures and policies and regulations corruption by the west particularly in its contracting mechanism in various different levels it's completely seen in different contexts as compared to what the corruption is seen in afghanistan t

and afghanistan and that is disrupting and dismantling and we are going to ultimately defeat. but this base the question since the valid goal of invading afghanistan to find bin laden is now comp list what is to be done about al qaeda which though many argue is no longer relevant as french as the sell out across the region last week it issued a response to bin ladin skilling saying his quote blood will be a curse that will chase the americans and their agents a curse that would pursue them inside and outside their country the spiral of this obama seems to be sticking to his guns promising to move forward with a plan to withdraw from afghanistan. the white house too has reaffirmed obama's stance saying the drawdown is on but they operation against al qaeda will now be relegated to the afghan army the focus of that operation of the u.s. personnel in afghanistan is an al qaeda operation continues the july two thousand and eleven transition date for the beginning of a drawdown remains. very much in place the pace of the drawdown will be determined by conditions on the ground but i

russians in may have finally killed the man who was the main reason behind a decade long war in afghanistan but it's doing little to silence critics who say the operation is stuck fast enough wagner. fresh nato airstrikes hit the libyan capital overnight but still a little sign of progress for either side in the conflict prompting more talk about coalition ground troops going in but experts say the move could strike the death toll greatly. moscow wants guarantees new u.s. plans for parts of a missile shield in romania pose no threat to its own deterrent this as russia and nato are in the midst of talks over a common missile defense for europe cross talk coming up next stay with us here on our. can. stand. alone welcome to crossfire computer all about with the killing of osama bin laden what has changed us president barack obama says justice has been done in the world is better and a safer place bin laden is no more so as the so-called war on terror been worth it . can. still. cross talk the war on terror in the post bin laden era i'm joined by patricia de janeiro a professor of internationa

the one looking at afghanistan. hope to resolve that and take you back over to the hearing momentarily. u.s. house come in for their general speeches this morning. as we mention add moment ago we will come back at noon. two bills today, repealing mandatory funding for two programs established by the health care law. over in the senate today, general speeches but we might see some possible debate and vote on a resolution commending u.s. forces and the intelligence community for their successful operation in bringing about the death of osama bin laden. we mentioned that senate foreign relations committee, that's on the situation in afghanistan. there will be a hearing later this afternoon on the house side, homeland security subcommittee looking at the security threat from pakistan. particularly in the wake of the killing of osama bin laden. that's coming up at 2:00. that will be live on our companion network, c-span3. we'll take you back live now over to senate foreign relations. >> about the performance of our troop

can pull out of afghanistan pakistan can solve begin begin to pick up the pieces and then we return to some sort of normalcy you know mark if i can go to you the fact that he was in pakistan killed there there is reports coming out today that bin laden could have been living there for six years and that is pretty remarkable on one of america's close this our eyes on the war on terror after billions and billions of dollars of aid and he's killed there apparently without the knowledge of the pakistani authorities which is just impossible to fathom that ok i mean what is going on here. well for me what it really calls into question is our presence in afghanistan for a decade and what it was that for if the already clee the only right the only justification we had to be in afghanistan was to hunt down and capture or kill the people directly responsible for the september eleventh attacks i mean that's really the only legal and moral justification the united states would have had to be there instead we've engaged in you know once we went in there you know the paraphrase colin powell we broke

troops in afghanistan. are you worried about providing a specific end date and that would possibly enable the taliban to move in the day after the u.s. troops left? >> first of all, i am not in favor of a time table. i am in belief that that time table should be tomorrow. i realize that may be several months. i was opposed to us going into iraq from the beginning. i really thought that there was no threat to our national security. i really thought that if we went into iraq, we would find ourselves in a civil war to which there would be no end. i thought we had the military surveillance capability to see iraq roll outf any weapons of mass destruction and if they would have done that, we could have gone in and dealt with that. afghanistan, originally, i was completely supportive of that. we were attacked. we attacked back. that's what our military is for. after six months, i being we pretty effectively had taken care of al qaeda. but that was 10 years ago. we are building roads, schools, bridges and highways

killed osama bin laden but many questions still remain one of the biggest being our current war in afghanistan we're asking are we done yet then rumors are flying as to how torture may have played a role in the hunt for bin laden so tonight i'll speak with military blogger jim hansen to figure out what we've heard is really fact and what's fiction then all the economic front i'll ask if the u.s. has gone bankrupt searching for al qaeda as number want wars in iraq and afghanistan the cost of homeland security all of these factors have weighed heavily on our national purse so when we realize we can't afford any more war answer it marks the fortieth anniversary of the significant protests that took place here in washington d.c. so on this historic day will investigate why there are any large scale protests in our country like we used to see and decades past and we love this segment so much that we've expanded it to cover every day this week it's happy hour i'll be joined by jim hansen and producer jenny churchill to discuss all the stories that are making a buzz but that phone is going to have to

is it time to leave afghanistan?he numbers to call it -- democrats, (202) 737-0002 republicans (202) 737-0001, an independents (202) 628-0205. you can e-mail us and we are on twitter. let's take a look at this "usa today" ps. is it time for america's longest war to end? nearly six in 10 americans think so, according to a usa today/gallup poll taken over the weekend. other newspapers asking similar questions this morning. from the "new york times," the killing of osama bin laden has set off a reassessment of the war in afghanistan. that's their right to that phones to hear what you think about this. roger in michigan, good morning. t think it is time for troops to leave afghanistan? caller: it is time for us to leave. when president bush took us time -- there, he said that we needed to deal with the twin towers business and everyone agree with that. the idea was to get the person to it did that. and we did. this is not barack obama's or any longer. iraq was never his work. our economy is tied to this and president oba

what exactly is the mission in afghanistan? >> i think the administration has expressed a relatively clearly. the core goal that the white house has put forward is the idea to disrupt, defeat, in the af-pak region and they want to be stable left to achieve that goal. more specifically in terms of transition, in one sentence, i think the mission of the moment now is to make the country stable enough that we can reduce the u.s. footprint to a sustainable level without an unacceptable drop in security. there are two important words there -- sustainable and unacceptable. sustainable, i think, means fiscally, and unacceptable translates into the core gold. and a couple drop in securities is one that undermines our ability to destructive defeat them in the region. we're making afghanistan stable as a means to an end of defeating outcry in the region. i think that is a relatively low bar for some of the goals. that does not mean it will not cost a lot of resources to get their. that is probably a separate question. >> dr. john, do you

still in afghanistan especially now that osama bin ladin is out of the picture. the military targets these people because they aren't toeing the line they're not. they're not playing the game but they are just doing their jobs so why are journalists abroad getting killed at the hands of the u.s. military. that evening it's wednesday may fourth by five pm i'm laurin a stranger watching our t.v. now it's a fog of war or you may want to just call it the fog of p.r. the obama administration since announcing bin laden's death has flip flopped on the details first it was a firefight and an armed bin laden fought back listen to this he was engaged in a firefight with those that entered the area of the house he was in and whether or not he got up in the rounds i quite frankly don't know. they later the white house knew that an ounce bin laden wasn't armed at all they gave a different account take a look at a woman rather bin laden's wife rushed the u.s. assaulter and was shot in the leg but not to kill bin laden was then shot and killed he was not on that is just one inc

enemy number one could mean for america's war in afghanistan. and it's the fortieth anniversary of the biggest mass arrests in u.s. history the one nine hundred seventy one made a police crackdowns here in washington saw the arrest of nearly ten thousand antiwar protesters but with several wars and a faltering economy topping the agenda in spawn's eleven why aren't people taking their message to the streets. and the like states has the. freest. environment for the prints in the world so really it does why don't you tell that to the journalists for arrested for exercising their right to free speech of the world celebrates press freedom day see how the land of the free might just be the home of the repressed. it's tuesday may third world pm here in washington d.c. i'm lucy catherine of and you're watching our t.v. . now bin laden is dead the bogeyman who drove us foreign and domestic policy over the last decade is gone the question is right now what will it mean for the increasingly unpopular war in afghanistan or the seemingly perpetual war on te

washington may have finally killed the man who was the main reason behind a ten year long war in afghanistan but is doing little to silence the critics who say the operation is stuck in a crossfire. pression nato airstrikes hit the libyan capital overnight but there's still little sign of progress for any side in the conflict that's prompting it more talk about coalition ground troops going in but experts say the move could spike the death toll enormously. moscow wants counties that new u.s. plans for parts of a missile shield in romania posed no threat to its own to terror and this comes as russia and nato are in the middle of talks over a common missile defense tenure. and crosstalk is next here on out. can. you. go and welcome to cross talk i'm peter lavelle with the killing of osama bin laden what has changed u.s. president barack obama says justice has been done and that the world is better and a safer place bin laden is no more so as the so-called war on terror been worth it . can. you cross talk the war on terror in the post bin laden era i'm joined by patricia de janeiro a professor

if you visit the women in afghanistan, if you visit the women of afghanistan, many women in the congress have done, and some of our male colleagues as well, they will tell you whether you're talking about educated women in kabul, but really more relevant to me, poor, poor women in the provinces. i visited a group of women in one province -- a number of provinces and spoken to women there. and the women there say, we really want to educate our daughters eric we want to have access to health care clinics and the rest but we can't have that until we have security and we can't have security until we end corruption. so many things going on in afghanistan that must change. and there will be a better chance of their changing if we make an investment in the civilian side of this transition. whether it's diplomacy, whether it's part of the construction, they tell me not to say reconstruction because not much was there before. construction there, where they're building schools work evisited little girls in school in different parts of afghanistan, very encouraging. our troops know that we have to

withdrawal from afghanistan.means in terms of life on the ground because there are a lot of people including a lot of women who had used the space to try to build schools, build businesses, all of that stuff, and they wonder whether that is going to end when the international community leaves. >> well, stand by for just a second, gayle, because i want to ask wes about the troop numbers. let's go to the p, wes. how many troops right now, and what would you project when the president talks about withdrawals if they really are going to be substantial withdrawals? >> absolutely. and right here you see the map of afghanistan. and currently we have approximately 100,000 troops who are still currently trained who are operating in afghanistan within the field. but there's also two really important numbers that have to be thought about when we're talking about afghanistan with the administration and also congress, is thinking about the first number, is the fact that we have 1,219 killed. 19 k.i.a. and that doesn't include

. >> it's a story about afghanistan but it's about one woman and one family in afghanistan so it really personalizes some of the challenges of that country. it's called the dressmakers of speed and tells the story of >> guest: it tells the story of a young woman who is supposed to be a teacher and ended up becoming an entrepreneur because there were so tough on so many people and she was left as the head of a family with five brothers and sisters counting on her and she became an entrepreneur and a dressmakers because there was nothing else women were to able to do. >> host: the interesting thing is she had never sewn before and became a successful dressmaker. >> guest: in the course of spending years going back and forth in afghanistan writing the book which i really think celebrates the unsung heroines whose stories are never told during the war. what i learned is that she realized pretty quickly on that she was actually sort of lousy seamstress but she was a really good businesswoman, and the seamstresses kept coming to her house, the young and girls who knew the families were counti

in afghanistan. pakistan is a modern country, with millions upon millions of people, albeit with a disjointed government. so you can't look at it in a vacuum. that's not a fair assessment. >> understood. and finally, some of the most appealing framing we have heard here in the conversation around the bin laden kill, has been to look at it as a comma and not a period in the progression of this event. do you agree with that framing? >> absolutely. somebody is going to fill in the vacuum for bin laden. may 1 was a great day in american history, a great day in the war against terrorism. it validates a lot of what we were trying to do, and the fact that we will never rest until those that do us harm are brought to justice. that's what the message of may 1 is. but somebody is going to come up in the ranks, and we always have to be diligent. we got a lot of good intel out of that compound he was seized at. and right now, the powers that be in our country are working around the clock to make sure that if oth

we have a war going on in afghanistan. we are firing hellfire missiles in western pakistan and now we are dropping a lot of ordnance in libya. if you want to be a conspiracy theorist and you are a muslim, i think these americans are at war with islam. that would be a very dangerous situation for us to be in. >> just to raise the question, we are not fighting an ideology which would be that brand of islam. maybe we talked earlier today about we hid the reset button. how do we achieve success? it is not through body count. when we were in afghanistan i remember thinking at the time, this would be last april that success was measured in the number of police that were trained. the number of judges that were in town. is that still true? is that the new yardstick or the old yardstick? >> very good question. as i said earlier the number one need is security. the numbers 2 need is food. nine or ten years into this war 40% of the afghans go to bed hungry according to the un statistics. they have an insufficient supply of calories w

invasion of afghanistan is gone now the world is waiting to see if his death will bring about change and how america handles the ongoing conflict. and the victory over terror on russian soil by chief al qaeda coordinated in the north caucuses has been eliminated officials hopeful the news will devastate the region's terrorist network. strikes in libya seemingly getting in nato no way that the possibility of a ground attack looming ever more experts say that was the alliance's plan all of the. billboard is here in half an hour's time but for now it's cross talk with people they were enjoy. you can. still. go and welcome to cross talk i'm peter lavelle with the killing of osama bin laden what is changed u.s. president barack obama says justice has been done and that the world is better and a safer place bin laden is no more so as the so-called war on terror been worth it . and. crossed out the war on terror in the post bin laden era i'm joined by patricia de janeiro a professor of international security at new york university's department of politics in irvine we have mark divine he's

mission in afghanistan and pakistan. frankly the elimination of osama bin laden fulfilled a good part of what they say we are doing there. if there can be a moment of operational clarity in which to declare victory and get out, is osama bin laden's death that moment? across the idealogical divide we'll go talk to michael steel. >>> in his first major interview after taking over the u.s. war effort from general mccrystal in afghanistan, general david petraeus was asked on "meet the press" last august about osama bin laden. and about the importance of the united states getting osama bin laden. and about the connection between that and the afghanistan war. >> is his capture less important today than it was? >> well, i think he remains an iconic figure. i think capturing or killing osama bin laden is still a very, very important task for all of those who are engaged in counterterrorism around the world. let's remember why we are here. we're here so that afghanistan does not once again became a sanctuary for transnational ext

the endemic corruption, the high-level corruption that sprises in afghanistan -- exists in afghanistan is going to continue to exist. president karzai in a meeting mg that i attended was questioned about corruption. and his response was, well, 70% of the fund that you put into afghanistan are not funneled through my government, so who did you give your money to? it's a fair question. it's not a completely genuine one because there was plenty of money left over when you look at the 30%, but a lot of money disappearing in this process. and there are a lot of houses being built in kabul, multistory mansions, and land that's been expropose rated by senior officials of the afghan government. and nobody can explain how someone with a salary of $11,000 a year can build a multimillion dollar mansion. or other mansions are being built in dubai or purchased in dubai by people running kabul bank. and kabul bank is the, happens to be where we put all the fund for the pay of the afghan national army. now, some of that money may not be there when we need et, when we go to draw on it. this is a situa

laden at in kill osama bin laden deprives people who wanted to stay in afghanistan for other reasons of the argument that we would be leaving in defeat. it was the republicans can't use it against the president right now congressman jerrold nadler from new york said we accomplished what we had to do in afghanistan a long time ago we had to stop wasting our troops and our money and our lives and get up and chairman of the senate armed services committee carl levin advocated for a troop drawdown in afghanistan by saying afghans are now in an even better position to take responsibility because whatever direction it's coming from pakistan from that safe haven no longer has guidance whatever strength and lines presence or direction could give to even republicans around congressman jason chaffetz acknowledged that finding bin laden proves that we don't need one hundred thousand people on the ground in afghanistan their public unclip stern some florida simply say now the bin laden has been executed we must go home enters the white house and pentagon so that they're sticking to the withdrawa

we look at afghanistan. we look at the bipolar or non- rational activity that takes place in pakistan. it is hard for me to ascertain exactly what our strategic relationship is because we do not want this in extremas hands. other than that, it is hard for me to understand in today's terms, what are real strategic relationship is. i would love for you to talk with us. i know that he is tired from the long trek. i would like to have a conversation with you about what exactly that strategic relationship is. at present, it seems like we have a country that acts in rogue ways sometimes. as far as those things that are pressing, strategically, they are not much of a partner. >> if i could just say, we should have a classified moment at some point in time in the near term. i will arrange that with everybody. suffice it to say that i think that you're question is a legitimate one. it was at the center of discussions that we had. i will tell you, everything was on the table with as much precision and as much depth as

mission in afghanistan and pakistan.nation of osama bin laden fulfilled a good part of what they say we are doing there. if there can ever be a moment of operational clarify in which to declare victory and get out, is osama bin laden's death that moment? across the idealogical divide we'll go to find out some of the republican answer to that with former republican chairman michael steele. please stay tuned. ♪ got brass in pocket... ♪ gonna use my, my, my, imagination. ♪ the new blackberry playbook. ♪ cos i'm gonna make you see ♪ there's nobody else here, no one like me. ♪ small enough to take anywhere. powerful enough to take you everywhere. ♪ i'm special ♪ so special ♪ when it's planes in the sky ♪ ♪ for a chain of supply, that's logistics ♪ ♪ when the parts for the line ♪ ♪ come precisely on time ♪ that's logistics ♪ ♪ a continuous link, that is always in sync ♪ ♪ that's logistics ♪ ♪ there will be no more stress ♪ ♪ cause you've called ups, that's logistics ♪ >>> in his first major interview after taking over the u.s.

the question of cooperation with respect to afghanistan. i see opportunity in all of this to sort of punch a reset button and frankly serve our interests and theirs much more effectively. >> schieffer: what if they don't? what if they don't see it that way? do we just go it alone without them? >> here's the difficulty. i think don rumsfeld will ratify this. you know, we rely on the pakistanis for the transfer of our major supplies to afghanistan through karachi and through pakistan. we have opened a northern route but it's not capable of doing what we need to do. secondly, everybody has to understand that even in the getting of osama bin laden the pakistanis were helpful. we have people on the ground in pakistan because they allow us to have them. we actually worked with them on certain parts of the intelligence that helped to lead to him and they have been extraordinarily cooperative and at some political cost to them in helping us to take out 16 of the top 20 al qaeda leaders with a drone program that we have in the western part of the co

of al-qaeda in afghanistan. given the fact that you have had more threats, more attacks or attempted attacks on the u.s. homeland from yemen in the last two years than afghanistan, does it make sense to keep 100,000 troops on the ground in afghanistan in a long-term counterinsurgency operation? >> a couple of points. the principal goal of the effort in south asia, including afghanistan is strategic defeat of al-qaeda. absolutely. we took a big step toward that on sunday night. first point. the second point, we also have as a goal not to have afghanistan become or again a safe haven or a place where an organization like al-qaeda could have the operational space to plan against us. we are making progress, chris, on both of those goals and we made a lot of progress on goal number one on sunday night. with respect to the drawdown pace and numbers that will be decided on decisions going forward. with respect to the al-qaeda in the arabian peninsula in yemen, when the president came in office he decided to intensify e