Drop nukes

My opinion? Get the he** out now. It is a bottomless pit, a he**hole of failure. The longer we stay the behinder we get, the more people we lose. Happy Friday! :)

As a soldier and veteran I think that sending more troops amounts to sending more targets for the enemy to shoot at. Basically the Taliban are poor shots, but anyone can hit the broad side of a barn, and the extra troops amount to that. The war in Afghanistan is a special forces war. Small tactical units sent in to cut the heads off of the leadership. Instead of using brute force to fix the problem we should use a little finesse. I was in Iraq during the surge and we arrested many innocent people and killed them too. What beat the insurgents in Iraq wasn't more troops, it was that Iraqis were getting tired of being bullied and stepped up to the plate. The surge happened about 5 yeas into the war and by that time the Iraqis were able to get there stuff together. What Gen. McCrystal is suggesting is the same as ordering an exposed frontal mass attack on a defended position instead of finding away to attack it from behind.

Give him the troops. Let the soldiers fight the war and let McCrystal do the job that Obama put him there to do. It doesn't make much sense to put your man there and then ignore him when he tells you what he needs to get the job done.

I would say no more troops,and start pulling out.It has accomplished little in 8 years,and is essentially another Vietnam with no end in sight.

Send them, if Bush had of finished what was started in the first place instead of invading Iraq maybe Obama would be in this position he is in now. With Pakistan and other countries in the region finally hitting and clearing out the Taliban from their "safe havens" its time to step up the effort in Afghanistan as now the Taliban have really no place to hide and have to stand and fight

What the hell should Obama do? I'll tell ya. He should come out and give us a clear breakdown of our current objectives in Afghanistan. It's been a very long time since I've heard anyone that's running the show mention what our objectives are over there. You can't necessarily measure any type of success or failure unless you have a well-defined list of objectives. As for General McCrystal's request for more troops, I personally think that maybe instead of sending in more troops there needs to be a rethinking of strategy (as far as hunting down al Qaeda or Taliban). It doesn't seem like this is an the type of enemy that you would use require large numbers to fight (nor does it seem like a very strategic thing to do in light of the type of fighting that is going on). I would think that we would do better by thinking in smaller terms (using smaller tactical units), better utilizing human intelligence, and doing a better job at reaching out to the groups of people there that are willing to (or are already) fighting the Taliban (Bonus: btw, they are already there ;D ). But alas, who am I but just another couch-general (worse than a backseat driver huh?).

As at least one other respondent has stated: "Determine and clearly state what our objectives are" and devise a plan to achieve THOSE objectives, whether military, civil or other. Determine what metrics will be used to judge success or failure, and track those. Let us know what the plan is and have Congress vote it up or down. This should not be done in a vacuum, as if we own Afghanistan and can do whatever we want there. We do need to consult with allies and neighboring countries, particularly Pakistan. What we're doing now more or less unilaterally in Afghanistan is actually destabilizing Pakistan which, if its government topples or goes rogue the way the Afghans did in the 80s and 90s, will make Afghanistan look like Grenada. You don't want a completely destabilized or potentially militantly Islamic country the size of Pakistan -- with proven nukes -- on India's back door. The reason we're destabilizing Pakistan is that we're making Afghanistan unsafe for Al Queda, but we're trying to pussyfoot around the border of Pakistan by not pursuing them there. (And if we do cross that border in force, either with or without the 'approval' of the current Pakistani government, then we risk MORE problems with Pakistan.) Obama said one thing that was wiser than I've come to expect from him: "We can tolerate 'Taliban' in Afghanistan." We pretty much have to, so I'm glad he seems to recognize that. To our sensibilities those people are barbarians, and they treat each other as if they're all living in the Stone Age. But we can't make them good little Stop 'n Shop customers like we mostly are in the West, and if they at least stop flying OUR planes into OUR buildings, then we can turn a blind eye to what they do to each other.