Quite the change, from peacenik to warrior to peacenik again. The Daily Beast has the goods (h/t David Dayen):
In a weekend interview with The Daily Beast, Dean said he’s had a change of heart when it comes to the war he has often defended. “I actually supported the president when he sent extra troops to Afghanistan,” Dean said. “But I’ve come to believe that’s not a winnable war.”Yes, the issue with women and the Taliban is potent. Those views are seriously retrograde, and I don't credit this kind of paternalistic power-seeking as religion in any sense but camouflage.
Dean attributes his newly-held opposition to a crisis of faith in Afghan President Hamid Karzai—and in the war’s humanitarian value.
“I supported (ramping up troop presence) because I was concerned with what would happen to the women in the country” if the Taliban took control, Dean said. “But I recently read about Karzai saying some very sexist, terrible things, and it’s become obvious that there’s not a whole lot of difference between the two sides.” ... Dean didn’t specify what Karzai had done to draw such sharp criticism, but the prime minister has taken heat recently from women’s rights advocates, who say he’s bending to Taliban pressure at the expense of the country’s women.
But there are many reasons to rethink that so-called "good war." If you're looking for a primer, start with this, from our own Tom Wellington. It's an eye-opener. Looks like Dean's eyes have been opened up a bit as well.
GP
