The Center for American Progress (CAP) proposed a withdrawal plan from Iraq in 2005; in 2014 they are proposing airstrikes in that same country. What changed?
The answer is that the political party of the President changed. When George W. Bush, a Republican, was President, the war in Iraq was, according to CAP, an abysmal failure. Then, when Barack Obama, a Democrat, became President, CAP began to endorse the very kind of warmongering policies it so vehemently protested when Bush was President. Yet CAP calls itself a nonpartisan research organization/think tank. Why on earth would anyone believe such a fairytale, given the ample amount of evidence that CAP is anything but nonpartisan?
CAP's former president and founder, John Podesta, who also used to run a lobbying firm, left in 2011 to join the Obama administration. CAP's current president, Neera Tanden, served on Hillary Clinton's Presidential campaign in 2008. Such people hardly sound like politically disinterested observers kind enough to share their "knowledge" for the benefit of the nation; they have a political agenda and political allies (corporate Democrats) for whom they speak; truth, if they even care about it at all, is at the very bottom of priorities.
CAP was formed in 2003 to counter the unbalanced makeup of right-leaning versus left-leaning Beltway think tanks. Among the overtly political think tanks, CAP was one of the earliest to openly claim the progressive label. In doing so, it presented itself as a breath of fresh air for those who were tired of the likes of the Heritage Foundation and American Enterprise Institute controlling the dialogue. However, since the election of Barack Obama in 2008, CAP has clearly demonstrated that it is little more than a mouthpiece of the Democratic Party, a political party which has repeatedly demonstrated that it is NOT progressive.
Afghanistan: The Surge
The myth that the Center for American Progress (CAP) is nonpartisan was completely shattered once President Obama ordered escalation of the war in Afghanistan in 2009. In fairness though, this is actually an area in which CAP has been somewhat consistent. For instance, in late 2007, more than a year before Obama took office, CAP authored a report on Afghanistan entitled "40 Reasons to Reengage in Afghanistan," and the reasons given for escalation are every bit as irrational as the escalation itself. Some examples:
Poverty is widespread.
Literacy levels are inadequate.
Life expectancy is low.
Unemployment is high.
Domestic violence, forced marriages, and roadblocks to opportunity.
Lack of representation [of women] in the police force.
Poor maternal mortality rates.
While all those things are certainly troubling, CAP's report fallaciously implies that an increased military presence will unquestionably improve those situations, without even bothering to explain how. The report continues:
Current Resources are Being Wasted.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).