so, dipali, do you want to take the question about feudalism? >> sure. yes. well, let me start with the first. i've not heard 9/11 as an inside job articulated in afghanistan. they don't say that. the war on terror as a justification for occupation of another country, also have not heard that. i don't think there's any question that if 9/11 had not happened, that 9/11 happening was the catalyst for intervention in afghanistan. i think that's a very different statement than saying that it was an excuse for, to occupy another country. on the pair hell to -- >> dipali, before you go into that, i'd just like to comment on that same question. the united states held a series of direct discussions with the representatives of the taliban leadership in germany and in qatar over 2010 to 2012 and which, of course, al-qaeda and taliban's relationship to al-qaeda was a central question. and i can say that the taliban never questioned whether al-qaeda had carried out 9/11 or whether 9/11 was the reason the united states invaded afghanistan. they said you are punishing us f

i don't see anyone else up the of the line so i guess i think dipali. i'll i'm sorry someone is moving up. please go ahead. >> i have a history in afghanistan since 1967. that ding said we use the word strongmen warlord and we can also use governor in some cases. why don't we just say leader, regional leader? aren't we prejudicing the outcome by using different terms also without the u.s. aid or assistance will there be a state in that sense of the word? >> maybe i will take the opportunity and answering the question to say a couple of closing thoughts. the question about the use of the word is a really interesting and important one and this one that different people have written about. for me the word leader is as i said at the beginning i think is an accurate label for a number of these at yours first. i think i was interested in the kind of strength that they were bringing to the formal state. the kind of informal strength so the idea of ding strong in a particular way and away that we studied and understood different as a function of different chara

i don't see anyone else up the of the line so i guess i think dipali.i'll i'm sorry someone is moving up. please go ahead. >> i have a history in afghanistan since 1967. that ding said we use the word strongmen warlord and we can also use governor in some cases. why don't we just say leader, regional leader? aren't we prejudicing the outcome by using different terms also without the u.s. aid or assistance will there be a state in that sense of the word? >> maybe i will take the opportunity and answering the question to say a couple of closing thoughts. the question about the use of the word is a really interesting and important one and this one that different people have written about. for me the word leader is as i said at the beginning i think is an accurate label for a number of these at yours first. i think i was interested in the kind of strength that they were bringing to the formal state. the kind of informal strength so the idea of ding strong in a particular way and away that we studied and understood different as a function of different charac

. >> dipali before you answer i think we will take three to time because we have a long line. introduce yourself. >> carl mayor. a writer and journalist who has written and followed afghanistan for a long time and was helped by barney rubin. two interrelated questions. one is that i'm interested in what's happened in a few years of the past and thinking first of all the big figure on the radical islamic side. are these people still part of the political equation? the second question, i was interested yesterday to hear carlotta gall talk on npr and she was,. >> she is an author that just published a book called "the wrong enemy." >> what she was talking about pakistan making the obvious point that pakistan is related with domestic afghan politics making the point that there were two views she discerned of the americans about the military the role of the military in pakistan that paradoxically the u.s. military was much stronger and more stringent in saying we should be tougher on particularly protecting of the radicals on the border with afghanistan. it the diplomats, the civil

and i think that dipali's book has been a very important contribution to that discussion, and you will now have an opportunity to queue up at this table over here and purchase it from her, and she will sign them for you. thank you all for coming. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> booktv is on facebook. like us to interact with booktv guests and viewers, watch videos and get up-to-date information on events. facebook.com/booktv. >> booktv covers hundreds of author programs throughout the country all year long, and here's a look at some of the events we'll be attending this week. look for these programs to air in the near future on booktv on c-span2. on wednesday we'll be covering michael waldman, president of the brennan center for justice at new york university law school. he'll be talking about his book, "the second amendment: a biography," and he'll be speaking at the national constitution center in philadelphia. on thursday night booktv been in columbia, missouri, at the daniel boone regional library hosting a talk by pete moon who'll be discussing his writing and best-selling