Bob Woodward’s book are a great primer on this subject. But here’s a link to the turning point for the bad in Afghanistan…
http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/art...
just a little unimportant town that turned out to be a precursor of things to come.

http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.h...

Isn’t that why McKiernan was relieved? I do believe so. Mighta even read it here first.

1) He’s already sent in almost 40,000 reinforcements. The MEF and the support troops that were sent shortly after he took office. (Reinforcements that were requested some eight months before the Bush administration ended.) By all accounts those troops were pretty much wasted — sent to the wrong places and then spread too thin to be effective. You can be sure that he does not want to repeat that.

2) Our military support is the only real lever we have to make Karzai do what we want. If we fight the war for him regardless of his actions then the status quo will continue. If there is no realistic chance that things will change then sending the troops would be a mistake.

I have seen this government rush on too many things lately. Its rather refreshing to see a slower approach.

Decisiveness is a quality that saves lives once you’re on the battlefield, in deciding strategy its better to measure twice and cut once…in other words be sure of a decision before you send a 19 year old to possibly die if you’re wrong.

Speaking at a U.S. Institute of Peace event in August, Kilcullen laid out four reasons for continuing the war in Afghanistan: first, because the West has a moral obligation to see it through after making commitments to the Afghan people; second, because NATO would be severely weakened by failure; third, because the effect of a collapse in Afghanistan on neighbor Pakistan would be severe; and fourth, because Afghanistan could once again become a haven for terrorists.
++++++++++++

I think the U.S. has already met its Suez with the invasion of Iraq. U.S. influence militarily, politically, and financially is already on the wane. Pulling out of Afghanistan or staying in some vain effort to maintain what we have already effectively lost is laughable.

I do agree with Kilcullen that have a moral obligation to the Afghanis. For eight years we relegated Afghanistan to an economy of force operation, while turning a blind eye to a corrupt and inefficient Karzai government.

During the election, he said two things: 1– Afghanistan was the good fight. 2– He could compensate for his lack of experience with his “good judgement.” He sold me. I voted for him (full disclosure: I made that choice 100% because I couldn’t stomach the idea of Sarah Palin ever being in charge of anything remotely important).

Now we see that 1– He was just saying that so he wouldn’t look weak for wanting to quit in Iraq. 2– His lack of experience is a significant weakness.

President Obama is rejecting every option placed in front of him as though he can wish away the problem when the problems in Afghanistan are getting worse by the day. Taking a week or two is one thing, but he’s had MONTHS now to make a decision. He has taken in the advice from all of his advisors and is failing our troops by not being decisive.

Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires. If we follow this guys advice we’ll be next. Tailhook claimed 14 Admirals there rank and caused 300 Naval Aviators to lose there careers.

How come the losing planning and implementation of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have caused not one General to be fired?

i think you need to show that he did have both options on the table, and that this is not just a support for McChrystal’s option.

Afghanistan and Pakistan are both havens for terrorists, and will likely continue to be so long into the future. The question is, does the U.S. see it as a worthwhile future investment to stick with it and see if Afghanistan can field something approaching a Pakistan style government, that would attempt to fight some Taliban factions in the country. Pakistan would love for our operation in Afghanistan to fail, because they don’t want a strong Afghanistan (that would inevitably be a close ally of India), and it would relieve the pressure of having us operating on the opposite side of their border.

The U.S. needs to think carefully about how it pursues international terrorist organizations like Al-Qaida in the future. Future long term nation building on the scale of Afghanistan is not in our national interests. I’m so not sure giving political/military aide to an ineffectual and corrupt Somali government to combat Al Shabab is the right way to go either.

One thing is for sure, I’m quickly losing respect for a President who seems to not have the political courage to say what we all know he wants to say…which is pull out of Afganistan.

If anything, ISAF’S performance in Afghanistan has provided more ammunition to those who argue that NATO should be disbanded. If the U.S. can’t get our Europeans allies to see that a stable Afgnaistan (Central Asia) is in their future interests, than I don’t really think their is any point in keeping this organization( apart from an excuse to draw more Soviet satellites away from Russian influence). We already have peace keepers with ridiculous caveats governing their actions concerning military action– it’s called UN peacekeepers!

The terrorist are already in Pakistan, if we leave, they move back to Afghanistan. Its just more of the same…except they won’t have us to shoot at.

The Afghan people have to choose a side, if they don’t (and they haven’t) then our moral obligation has been paid in full.

And if Afghanistan becomes a terrorist refuge, I guess that means that Somalia, Pakistan, Indonesia and the other countries that are infected have a place to send their homegrown threats…

Who in there right mind believes that this nation has the will to fight for another (by his count) 5 years minimum to get this nation to a modicum of western style recognizable stability? I wonder if our forces could stand that much strain?

The truth of the matter is this. The General’s are facing their worse case scenario. They fought in Vietnam, swore that it would never happen again on there watch and are now faced with a Vietnam type scenario. We should be seeing a steady stream of resignations but we don’t. Our leaders, who would pound a private for any integrity violation, have themselves committed an integrity violation on an epic scale.

The US military is faced with another rebuilding task. Is facing a loss of respect (once the kit gloves are taken off and people start a realistic and mature look at the facts) and will be held responsible for probably the worst run campaign in US history.

Fire every one in the Pentagon.…that’s the first step to getting out of this mess.