CNN

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Bipartisanship in Washington is virtually non-existent these days - except for President Obama's new strategy for Afghanistan.

U.S. Marines are pictured wading through a canal in Afghanistan's Helmand Province.

A new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll - conducted after the president's speech this week - shows his plan wins approval from 63 percent of Democrats, a whopping 72 percent of Republicans and 55 percent of Independents. Gee, with a consensus like that you could actually run the country.

The president is getting thumbs-up from people more inclined to extend their middle fingers when it comes to things Democratic. Karl Rove says that the president's speech "deserves to be cheered" and insists victory is attainable.

Newt Gingrich is out praising President Obama for showing political courage on Afghanistan... in going against the anti-war left in his own party.

This is not to say that there aren't critics of the president's Afghanistan strategy in both parties, but on the whole, he's getting support - at least for now. If it doesn't go as planned, all bets are off. But at least for a few minutes we have the leadership of the country agreeing on something.

And this isn't just about President Obama and Afghanistan. The Democrats had no love lost for President George W. Bush but were mostly afraid to buck him on the wars.

Here’s my question to you: Why is it the only time there is bipartisanship is when the military is involved?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The suspect in the Fort Hood shootings - that left 13 dead and wounded 42 others - had asked the military to let Muslims claim conscientious objector status when it comes to going to war against other Muslims.

Fort Hood shooting suspect Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan

The Washington Post first reported on a slide presentation Army Major Nidal Hasan, who is Muslim, made as a psychiatric resident at Walter Reed back in 2007.

It was supposed to be about a medical topic, but instead Hasan lectured about Islam, suicide bombers and threats the military could face from Muslims conflicted about fighting Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan:

"It's getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against fellow Muslims."

Hasan was set to leave soon for Afghanistan, and a relative says he had asked not to be deployed.

But the Washington Post is now reporting that's not true - an Army official says Hasan never formally requested to leave the military as a conscientious objector or for any other reason.

Meanwhile there is no exact count of how many Muslims are in the U.S. military. The Pentagon lists about 3,500 Muslims out of 1.4 million service members. But officials say that number is probably low since disclosure is voluntary.

Nonetheless, this seems to be a real issue that might continue to present itself with U.S. troops still in Iraq; and potentially tens of thousands of additional troops being sent to Afghanistan.

Here’s my question to you: Should Muslim members of the U.S. military be forced to fight against other Muslims?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

Call it CBS News versus the White House.

CBS reports that President Obama intends to give General Stanley McChrystal most - if not all - of the 40,000 troops he's asking for in Afghanistan. They say the president has tentatively decided to send four combat brigades plus thousands of more support troops.

General Stanley McChrystal is the U.S. Military commander in Afghanistan.

According to CBS, the troop buildup would last for about four years - until the Afghan military doubles in size. This surge would mean the number of U.S. troops would grow from the current 68,000 to about 100,000 by the end of the president's first term.

But the White House insists the CBS story is false. They call reports that the president has made a decision about Afghanistan "absolutely false." They say Mr. Obama still hasn't received or reviewed "final options" with his national security team.

So - who's telling the truth here? It comes down to the word of the Obama White House against the network of Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite.

Of course... CBS News also saw Dan Rather step down in 2005 after apologizing for a report that questioned President George W. Bush's National Guard service. Rather said the report was based on false documents.

Meanwhile the Associated Press seems to support the CBS story, saying President Obama is nearing a decision to add tens of thousands of additional troops to Afghanistan - but not the 40,000 that McChrystal wants.

Some officials dub that likely troop increase McChrystal Light since it would fall short of the general's request.

Here’s my question to you: CBS News says nearly 40,000 additional troops will be sent to Afghanistan. The White House says the story is false. Whom do you believe?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The Army might have had a terrorist in its midst and not even known it. As the days pass, there are more and more signs that Army Major and psychiatrist Nidal Hasan - who slaughtered 13 people and wounded 42 others - was an Islamic extremist who was sympathetic to al Qaeda and had strong objections to U.S. policy in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the suspect in last week's Fort Hood mass shooting.

Independent Senator Joe Lieberman says the shootings could have been a terrorist attack; and that he'll launch an investigation into whether the military could have stopped it.

Lieberman, who chairs the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, says there's evidence Hasan was a "self-radicalized, home-grown terrorist." If that's true, last week's killings could be the worst terror attack on U.S. soil since 9/11.

Witnesses say at the time of the shootings Hasan shouted "Allahu Akbar" - Arabic for "God is great" - something terrorists have used as a battle cry.

Then there's this: Hasan apparently attended the same Virginia mosque as two of the 9/11 hijackers in 2001 - at a time when a radical spiritual leader preached there.

And, ABC News reports U.S. intelligence agencies knew for months that Hasan was trying to contact people associated with al Qaeda.

Finally, former classmates complained repeatedly about what they saw as Hasan's anti-American views. One says Hasan gave a presentation that justified suicide bombing and talked about how Islamic law trumped the U.S. Constitution.

The Army isn't ruling out terrorism - but is concerned about a possible backlash against Muslim soldiers.

Here’s my question to you: Do you think the Fort Hood shootings were an act of terrorism?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

As the U.S. continues to fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - it seems like a sharp military mind in the Oval Office may come in handy. The New York Times reports on growing speculation that General David Petraeus - who oversees those two wars - might run for president in 2012. Petraeus' people deny it - but some say the White House is still suspicious.

Aides to Petraeus say he hasn't voted for more than five years - to preserve a sense of military impartiality. And although he's been described as a Republican - one top military official close to the general says he couldn't confirm his political party.

In any case - the Times points out how Petraeus, who was a favorite of George Bush, has taken on a more muted voice in the debate over Afghanistan. But he continues to have a seat at the table, as the Obama administration wrestles with sending as many as 40,000 additional troops to the fight .

There was a time when military service was a political asset - Eisenhower came to the White House via the military and was one of America's most popular presidents... JFK, Nixon, Carter - among others - also served.

But in recent elections, the attitude towards men in uniform has changed... voters rejected John McCain, John Kerry and Bob Dole - all veterans.

Here’s my question to you: Would you vote for a military commander for president in 2012?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

(PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

More bad news about the war in Afghanistan. Military commanders say they don't have enough troops and warn that the Taliban is getting stronger and even gaining the upper hand in several parts of country. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, says, "It's serious and it's deteriorating."

Case in point, last week's election, which was only the second in the nation's history. The ballots are still being counted, results are expected tomorrow, but we already know voter turnout was low amid threats of violence. There are reports of voters' fingers being cut off. More than 200 complaints have been filed with The Election Complaints Commission, and one of the candidates is alleging fraud.

History shows a long list of failed foreign incursions into Afghanistan. So the U.S. may be taking a spot behind the Greeks, the British, and the Russians, who have all come before them-and left defeated.

For now, the Obama Administration is waiting for a new report on the situation (due out in two weeks) from the top commander in the region. Regardless of what it says, troop levels by the end of this year are on track to be double the number there at the end of last year.

In March, President Obama ordered an additional 17,000 troops into Afghanistan, but all indications are it's not nearly enough. Meanwhile, public support here at home for a war that is going on eight years is hardly increasing.

Here’s my question to you: Is it time to declare the war in Afghanistan a lost cause and get out?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

(PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Since the Obama administration lifted the ban on media coverage of fallen troops returning to the U.S., most military families are choosing to allow reporters and photographers to witness the ceremonies.

The press had been banned from covering these solemn ceremonies ostensibly to protect the privacy of the soldiers' families. Cynics suggest it was because President Bush didn't want attention drawn to the fact that soldiers were being killed in the phony war he started in Iraq.

The ban was actually imposed 18 years ago by Bush's father, the first President Bush, during Operation Desert Storm. The father of one Army corporal recently killed in Iraq said, "I think it was to protect the government's butt." That's exactly what it was.

So far - 14 of 19 families have allowed the media cover their loved one's return. The Pentagon calls it "a pretty good majority." The Air Force Mortuary Affairs office says reporters have been cooperative and there haven't been any problems. They also say they'll help facilitate a meeting with reporters if the family wants... although only one family has done that so far.

Sadly, media interest has dropped off rather dramatically in just a few short weeks: almost 40 members of the press turned up for the return of the first combat casualty they were allowed to cover... at a more recent ceremony, the AP says its photographer was the only one.

Here’s my question to you: What does it mean if most military families want the media to cover the return of fallen troops to the U.S.?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

Soldiers with a joint U.S. Army, Navy and Air Force Provincial Reconstruction Team keep cover in Afghanistan's Shemgal Valley. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

From CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The U.S. is losing the war in Afghanistan - so says Senator John McCain.

"When you aren't winning in this kind of war, you are losing. And, in Afghanistan today, we are not winning," said McCain.

The former presidential candidate says although he approves of President Obama's plan to send 17,000 more troops there. He thinks additional allied and Afghan troops will be needed to bat back a resurgent al Qaeda and Taliban. He's calling for the U.S. to set up a larger military headquarters and to boost nonmilitary assistance.

The Arizona Senator says that the situation in Afghanistan is nowhere near as bad as it was in Iraq - but that insurgent attacks were up sharply last year and violence increased more than 500 percent in the last 4 years.

McCain's comments come after those of Defense Secretary Robert Gates - who has said the U.S. faces "a very tough test" in Afghanistan, although Gates is confident we will "rise to the occasion."

A new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll shows most Americans agree with McCain... only 31% say the U.S. is currently winning the war in Afghanistan, although 62% say the U.S. can eventually win it.

Meanwhile - when it comes to the other war, the one in Iraq, McCain is among several Republicans backing President Obama's plan to pull most U.S. troops out by August 2010. McCain says the plan is a "reasonable" one and he's "cautiously optimistic" that it can lead to success.

Here’s my question to you: Is John McCain right that the U.S. is losing the war in Afghanistan?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

American soldiers search for caves concealing weapons in eastern Afghanistan. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

From CNN's Jack Cafferty:

President Obama has decided to send another 17,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan. More than 7 years into the war there, this move will increase U.S. troop levels by 50%. The president insists that "urgent attention and swift action" are needed to fight a resurgent Taliban and al Qaeda. The increased troop levels are expected to last 3 to 4 years.

American and NATO casualties – along with Taliban attacks- were at record highs last year. War-related civilian deaths were up almost 40%.

Although Mr. Obama hasn't made a call yet on troop cuts in Iraq, his decision will move troops to Afghanistan who had been scheduled to deploy to Iraq. The president has said he wants to limit objectives in Afghanistan. These new troops will be headed to southern and eastern regions, will help train the Afghan army and help provide security for the August elections.

The U.S. commander in Afghanistan had actually asked for more than 30,000 additional troops, which would have doubled the current force.

A tough decision – one of many – made by the new president these days, especially when you consider the public may not be behind escalating our military effort in Afghanistan. Recent polls shows 34% of Americans think the U.S. should send more troops there. 29% call for a decrease. Also, only 18% of Afghans think we should step up our presence – not exactly a warm welcome.

Here’s my question to you: Is a prolonged American military presence in Afghanistan a good idea?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

From CNN's Jack Cafferty:

President Obama issued three executive orders today that signal a sharp departure from the Bush Administration. One of them bans torture. It ends the CIA practice of so-called enhanced interrogations and requires the Army field manual be followed for terror interrogations.

Leg shackles sit on the floor at Camp 6 detention center at the U.S. Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The Bush administration and intelligence agencies under Bush's command said the tactics were the only way to get information from suspects being held captive in the war on terrorism.

The techniques include forceful grabbing and slapping, forced standing for more than 40 hours while shackled and handcuffed, holding naked prisoners in a 50 degree cell while splashing them with cold water, and waterboarding which simulates drowning.

At one point the former CIA director and former attorney general both testified to lawmakers about the value of the practices.

Human rights organizations, of course, said the U.S. was out of line and said they were violating international laws.

It's been the subject of much debate since coming into practice in 2002 and now President Obama has put a stop to it.

Here’s my question to you: Does forbidding so-called "enhanced" interrogation techniques send an invitation to enemies of the United States?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »