This is the Cato Daily Podcast for Monday, March 12, 2012. I'm Caleb Brown.

Arguments in favor of staying in Afghanistan are growing less credible by the day.

Now another U.S. soldier is accused of killing several Afghan villagers complicating what is

supposed to be a mission of winning hearts and minds to the U.S. cause.

At the Cato Institute's Benefactor's summit in February, Cato foreign policy analyst

Maloo Innocent walked through some of the arguments for staying and why we should leave.

So these are some of the standard claims made most often about the war in Afghanistan,

and I'm sure you're very familiar with them.

The first is that gains are fragile and reversible.

The second, that policy should be based on control. is that gains are fragile and reversible.

Second, that policy should be based on conditions

on the ground.

And the third, that withdrawal will undercut progress.

In terms of the first, I actually

agree with that first statement that gains are fragile and reversible.

In fact, Chris and I are the first to concede that in war, tactical gains are always fragile and reversible.

In fact, according to the 2012 National Intelligence

estimate, which is the authoritative assessment of the 16

different intelligence agencies, security gains in Afghanistan

are unsustainable.

And also, if we're talking about conditions on the ground,

pervasive corruption, government incompetence, militant safe havens in Pakistan

...