This will be a short one....I'll probably expand on it later.
We entered Afghanistan late in 2001, blood in our eye from the cowardly murders of September 11th, and without too much push-back from the world at large. We can discuss at length how much thought was put into the long term; the fact that we could break the Taliban as a "ruling" force in the country was pretty much a given. Whether we could effectively remove them from the "board" as major players was another question entirely.
Still, I firmly believe it needed to be done.
I had always hoped that military and civilian planners recognized the challenges, ones that still exist and some of which make some of what we did in Iraq look like a simple, field-training exercise by comparison. (Do not mistake my words...Iraq was NOT....it was neither easy nor assured, but it had multiple factors that stood it in better stead to "succeed" and become an independent state again.) Afghanistan's lack of marketable resources (other than opium), poorer national infrastructure, Tribal affiliations and identities that are even stronger than in Iraq, and warrior history that has sent major world powers packing over several centuries all present significant hurdles.
Afghanistan was always the tougher challenge, hence one of my primary concerns about invading Iraq in 2003....we still had way too much work to do in Afghanistan and Iraq would (and did) both divert our military resources and focus and divide our domestic focus as well. I've long stated the opinion we shouldn't have worried about Iraq until we had Afghanistan stood back up as soverign nation.
Having said all that, this one really sticks in my craw. The anti-war Democrats and large sections of the "Left" all screamed and yelled about our invasion of Iraq and several folks from those groups are on record as saying we should not have turned our backs on Afghanistan. (I finally agree with some of those folks....will wonders never cease.)
Now the Dems have the White House and Congress, and they have the war they always kept yelling is the one we should be fighting. Except, they're screwing it up. For as much as they kept wanting to compare Iraq to Vietnam, the current situation looks a lot more like our early days in 'Nam. Rules of engagement intended to be humanitarian but actually just put our troops in unnecessary danger and a, to date, ham-handed approach to strategy flowing directly from the White House. It smacks of McNamara et al, picking bombing targets for the Air Force from their air-conditioned offices in D.C.
Ignoring all the media B.S. (I'm sorry....media interpretation...) about Gen McChrystal and the Prez's working relationship, something is clearly wrong.
Mr. President, you're the CinC. It's ultimately on your head. Either entrust your commanders to do the job they're good at, or simply acknowledge Afghanistan cannot be won in any conventional sense...or at least admit you aren't willing to do what is necessary to let us win. But the minutes you spend dithering are counted in the lives of our service members.
Listen to your experts, get a new set, or get us the hell out. (The last being the worst option as we'll just dance this dance all over again down the road a bit.)
Either way.....DO something.
Oh....and....uhm where's Code Pink? A dozen troops from Ft. Carson slaughted because of dumb-ass ROEs and not a peep.
Hypocrites.