by Mark Silva
Hopping from war zone to war zone, Vice President Dick Cheney has used a palatial hotel on the Gulf of Oman in Muscat as a launching pad for surprise journeys into Iraq and now Afghanistan this week.
“During the last six years, the people of Afghanistan have made a bold and confident journey, throwing off the burden of tyranny, winning your freedom and reclaiming your future,’’ Cheney said at the presidential palace in Kabul today with President Hamid Karzai. “The process has been difficult, but the courage of the nation has been unwavering.
Cheney was asked in a joint press availability today at the palace -- reachable after a gauntlet of cement barriers in the war-torn capital, though Cheney's party flew from the air base in Kabul in CH-47 Chinook choppers to the palace because the roadway is so risky -- about the future deployment of U.S. troops and NATO forces in Afghanistan and the country's own role.
“Our general view is that we need to do both: That is to say that the United States and the other members of the coalition need to have a sufficient force here to be able to ensure security, to deal with a threat that's been represented by continuing activities by the radicals and extremists, and the likes of the Taliban and al Qaeda, but that ultimately security in Afghanistan will depend upon the ability of the Afghan people to provide adequate forces that are well trained and well equipped,’’ he said.
“So we are moving forward on both fronts, working with your government here in Afghanistan, to at the same time have U.S. forces continue to work in security and reconstruction, while at the same time we work with you to train the forces sufficiently so that someday Afghanistan will be able to stand on its own.’’
What makes him confident that NATO will “step up?’’
“This obviously has been a very important mission -- really the first time in the history of the Alliance that we've had this kind of commitment this far from the normal NATO area of responsibility,’’ Cheney said. “But I think we are better off by virtue of NATO's presence. I think they've made a significant contribution in many parts of the country. And we believe that that commitment needs to continue, and perhaps be reinforced.
“It's one of the reasons when the president goes to Bucharest here in a couple of weeks to participate in the NATO summit, one of the most important items on the agenda will be the NATO role and mission here in Afghanistan,’’ he said of President Bush’s coming trip to Bucharest. “I would expect that we'll see a reaffirmation and a resumption, if you will, or renewal of the commitment that we've made collectively as an Alliance to the independence and freedom of the people of Afghanistan.
“I'm quite confident that in fact NATO will continue to play a major role and hopefully even expand their efforts beyond those that they've already undertaken.’’
Cheney was asked about the situation in Pakistan and about his reaction to the latest tape released this week by Osama bin Laden – “I haven’t seen the statement’’ he said of the al Qaeda leader’s latest communique.
“With respect to the new government of Pakistan, I expect they'll be good and effective friends and allies of the United States, just as the previous government has been,’’ Cheney said. “I have no reason to doubt their commitment to dealing with the problems that emerge from that area if terror groups are allowed to operate from there, in part because I think their government is a target for the al Qaeda and the extremists in the northwest section of Pakistan.
"You've seen a number of devastating attacks against the people and government of Pakistan, including of course the tragic assassination of former Prime Minister Bhutto. So they have as big a stake as anyone else in dealing with the threat that sometimes emerges from those areas along the border.’’
• 
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Gee, I guess Cheney hasn't been over to Langley recently to preview what they're up to.
Posted by: John Chuckman, Toronto, Canada | March 20, 2008 9:12 AM
Haven't seen the statement....
Hey, maybe McCain is more on top of this.
Posted by: RomanB | March 20, 2008 9:33 AM
“With respect to the new government of Pakistan, I expect they'll be good and effective friends and allies of the United States, just as the previous government has been,’’ Cheney said. “I have no reason to doubt their commitment to dealing with the problems that emerge from that area if terror groups are allowed to operate from there, in part because I think their government is a target for the al Qaeda and the extremists in the northwest section of Pakistan."
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiighttt. Wasn't it the previous government who agreed to let Al-Qaeda have their own little corner in the northwest part of the country so they could set up base there??
I don't have to listen to what 67% of the American people think - as long as Haliburton and KBR are making money on the war, that's good enough reason to stay there for me!!!
Posted by: BobinATL | March 20, 2008 10:01 AM
Osama binLaden is all but irrelevant at this point in time. He has done nothing but talk a big game, defending his big and mighty allah god, but has yet to produce anything from his remote office campus in NW Pakistan.
*spits in binLadenface and on muhammed's grave*
Posted by: Steve Hussein S | March 20, 2008 10:36 AM
I'd like to retract my comment on spitting on muhammed's grave. This was disrepectful... I was simply being rude and inconsiderate to the peaceful followers of Islam.
sorry to those who were offended.
Posted by: Steve Hussein S | March 20, 2008 11:02 AM
Stevie:
He's irrelevant?
Is that the new GOP party line??
Wouldn't he be even more irrelevant if we actually caught him?
You know, "dead or alive", like your President said.
Posted by: BobinATL | March 20, 2008 11:12 AM
The lefts favorite rant is, why hasn't Osama been KILLED yet!
KILL-KILL-KILL HIM!
...but don't pour any water down Mr. terrorists nose and mouth trying to find Osama...that's not nice.
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | March 20, 2008 11:22 AM
I find it curious that McCain would claim he without a doubt knows how to get Bin Laden and where he is, yet won't share this information the current administration. I wonder if the parents of the soldiers who return home in bodybags agree with McCain's witholding his strategy.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/01/29/mccains-secret-plan-to-get-bin-laden/
Posted by: jackson | March 20, 2008 12:02 PM
"Murder can be fun"- Charles Manson
"Murder is quite possibly the most thrilling and liberating experience. Quite frankly, I can't get enought of it." - then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney
Posted by: jo | March 20, 2008 12:04 PM
Hey Dick,we've lost 4,000 soldiers and spent 600 billion of tax dollars in Iraq.
Cheney,SO!
Posted by: Raving Loon | March 20, 2008 12:51 PM
"irrelevant" wasn't the best word to express what I meant... the word i'm looking for indicates that is he no longer in control and not much of a factor in the day to day activity of terrorism. He has been rendered effectively impotent by the pressure of the international coalition. If he's caught... great, but keeping him down is the next best option.
Posted by: Steve Hussein S | March 20, 2008 1:16 PM
Dick Cheney has made lots of money for himself and for other Halliburton stockholders over the last seven years, but his grasp of the war in Iraq hasn't been anything to brag about.Here are some previous comments by Cheney about Iraq:
"My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators." --March 16, 2003
"We know he's been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." --March 16, 2003
"I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency." -- on the Iraq insurgency, June 20, 2005
With that brilliant track record, who wouldn't be looking for Cheney's advice now?
Posted by: Tom O | March 20, 2008 1:27 PM
So now the same person who was the launching point for a war that has cost thousands of lives and billions and billions of dollars only a few years ago is suddenly "irrelevant"? What a completely idiotic and hyper-biased point of view. Typical right-winger, when the answer isn't right, change the question. Don't bother with any further comments. Just type "My side is always right, and yours is always wrong", regardless of the substance of the issue. Obviously that's pretty much your stance on everything anyway. Why let reality and common sense cloud your judgement?
Posted by: John | March 20, 2008 1:41 PM
So now the same person who was the launching point for a war that has cost thousands of lives and billions and billions of dollars only a few years ago is suddenly "irrelevant"?
Posted by: John | March 20, 2008 1:41 PM
see my change of wording you baseless boob. Irrelevant was the wrong word. I'm saying Osama has been all but eliminated from the functioning of and flailing Al Qaeda organization. Irrelevant - no. Pinned down - yes.
I fixed my error.
and whats with the rest of your irrational post? grow up.
Posted by: Steve Hussein S | March 20, 2008 2:24 PM
irrelevant" wasn't the best word to express what I meant... the word i'm looking for indicates that is he no longer in control and not much of a factor in the day to day activity of terrorism. He has been rendered effectively impotent by the pressure of the international coalition. If he's caught... great, but keeping him down is the next best option.
Posted by: Steve Hussein S | March 20, 2008 1:16 PM
So we're not fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq then Steve? Iraq isn't part of the offensive against those who attacked us?
Posted by: Luke | March 20, 2008 4:14 PM
So we're not fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq then Steve? Iraq isn't part of the offensive against those who attacked us?
Posted by: Luke | March 20, 2008 4:14 PM
what does that have to do with what I posted. The administration carelessly used terms that indicated a link from 9/11 to Iraq. While they've admitted now that there was not, their reckless language was out of line.
Again... what was your point?
Posted by: Steve Hussein S | March 20, 2008 5:16 PM
My point Steve, is that the Administration and the Republican Party continue to tell us on a daily basis that in Iraq we are fighting Al Qaeda, the people that attacked us. Your statement abount the unimportance of Bin Ladin directly contradicts that arguement. If Bin Ladin is "no longer in control and not much of a factor in the day to day activity of terrorism." Those we fight in Iraq are Al Qaeda in name only and our President and his lap dogs continue to lie to us.
Posted by: Luke | March 20, 2008 5:55 PM