All the long term plans about US presence in Afghanistan after troop withdrawal in 2014 are susceptible to vagaries of such incidents as Koran burning killing of Afghan civilians by a US soldier.

Clearly US is itching to get out and such incidents are hastening the day of departure.

The whole reason why Afghan war is still continuing, is Pakistani State’s support and shelter of Taliban insurgency that Dr. Gresh intentionally refuses to acknowledge.

Former Pentagon official Gen (rtd) Jack Keane said at a discussion on Afghanistan organized by the Institute for the Study of War, a Washington-based think-tank on June 30, 2011: "The truth is, the (Pakistani) ISI aids and abets the sanctuaries in Pakistan that the Afghan (Taliban) operate out of. They provide training for them, they provide resources for them and they provide intelligence for them. From those sanctuaries, every single day Afghan fighters come into Afghanistan and kill and maim us (US/NATO troops)". General Keane also added that “There are two ammonium nitrate factories in Pakistan. 80 per cent of the explosive devices that are used to kill our soldiers, kill Afghan security forces and kill Afghan people come from Pakistan."

Previous US ambassador Anne Patterson to Pakistan, wrote in a secret review in 2009 that ‘Pakistan's Army and ISI are covertly SPONSORING four militant groups - Haqqani‘s HQN, Mullah Omar‘s QST, Al Qaeda and LeT - and will not abandon them for any amount of US money‘, diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks show.

Ambassador Patterson had NO reason to mislead her own State Department and U. S. government.

Adm Mullen told the foreign news media on 1/13/2011 about America’s primary ally in America’s fight against terrorism, that: “I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, it [Pakistan] is the epicenter of terrorism in the world right now. It is absolutely critical that the safe havens in Pakistan get shut down. We cannot succeed in Afghanistan without that. It’s not just Haqqani Network anymore, or Al Qaeda or TTP (Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan), the Afghan Taliban, or LeT (Lashkar-e-Tayyeba), it’s all of them working together.”

As long as US continues to allow Pakistan playing this double game of ‘running with the terrorist hares while hunting with the American hounds‘, US/NATO deserve to be duped by Pakistan for ignoring Pakistani State’s terrorist connections.

So, if the White House said this, "There are no options, and Tom Donilon isn't pushing any specific option or policy proposal," then they have told us at least two things: 1) don't confuse us with the facts because our minds are made up; and, 2) Donilon isn't pushing any particular plan because the decision has already been made and is cast in concrete.

The last group to successfully conquer Afghanistan was the Arab Islamist Army, and that took nearly 400 years! Their invasion started in 670, finally took Kabul in 870, and didn't pacify the countryside until some time in the middle of the 11th century. And we think we can do it faster/better because?

These are the people who, ordered to step up training of a new and excellent Afghan army, simply didn't do it as they should have. Deploying his decades of administrative cunning, defense secretary Gates made Europe the place where he told the world that the US component of ISAF was thousands short in its needed deployment of trainers -- so, presumably as he wished it, virtually nobody in the United States knew about it and cared. Deploying THEIR decades of administrative cunning, the Kabul military elite presented a small group, perhaps only a platoon, of Afghans happy to marxch in sparkling order for any visiting dignitary or journalist -- and claimed this atypical small group was instead a sample of imaginary widespread achievement..

We don't know and Lindsey Graham doesn't seem to care about the cuttent balance of war aims and investments in Afghanistan. How much energy goes into raiding possible Taliban sites? How much into the training that will let America do what the habitually ill-informed George Bush named as standing down? The Republican interest seems only in numbers of boots on the ground, rather than how their wearers serve.

I must with regret disagree with SIN NOMBRE's "We didn't invade Afghanistan to take out the Taliban; we invaded when the Taliban refused to hand over bin Laden and stop hosting al Queda. And it was only *then,* after we had gone in that suddenly the mission changed; now we made it our goal to displace the Taliban."

George Bush told a joint session on Congress in September 2001 that the US was about to go in after al-Qaida and also against any nation harboring them. By nation harboring them, he clearly meant, in the Afghan context, the Taliban. Explaining their evil, he said life there was hell for barbers -- men were unable to lose their beards -- and they ënvy our freedom of association, perhaps the goofiest reason to go to some foreign nation and kill lots of foreigners to escape human lips. We know HOW it was that the US military in Afghanistan gave al-Qaida there as swift and easy escape from Tora Bora some few weeks after the invasion. I've seen no explanation yet of why -- or evidence that any military officer was punished for allowing that major military failure.

It's also significant that the Taliban, within a few hours of 9/11, made repeated public offers to capture the al-Qaida people within Afghan borders and bring them to justice. I've never seen any reason to think that this offer was insincere. What it was, apparently to great American loss, was ignored in Washington. But that seems to have been a civilian failure, rather than a military one. Nobody punished there, too.

I think what it comes down to is that when the president says: "We need to go to war with X", the members of congress are too afraid of looking weak to go against him..

"Is rio orange war always forfait illimite inevitable ?"
MaximB