What is the international support for this going to be? Because if it's anything like what we ended up with in Iraq, it will be kind of laughable. I would especially like to know what India is contributing to all this, because the U.S. would be doing India a great favor by getting rid of terrorists in Pakistan. Is India contributing substantial troops for this? I know the British are contributing troops, but I don't know how many. For me, it would be much easier to support this if the President were to form a true coalition to do this.
I'm conflicted about supporting a "surge" in Afghanistan. We had at least two opportunities to get our target-Bin Laudin-early on in the initial conflict. Historically, Staying there to "stabilize" the country has been a quagmire for the Russians and also the British. In the end, I worry that we will just be arming the Taliban. In 2004-2006 I would have said, let's get out of Iraq and focus on Afghanistan and neutralizing the terrorists. Now that we have been involved with this for over 8 years and Bin Laudin has switched countries, I can't see the point in staying there. I just can't see being able to solve Afghanistan's problems, which have been going on long before we got there, in 20 months.
Again, if this were a serious "desert storm" type coalition backed by the U.N. to stabilize Afghanistan, capture Bin Laudin and neutralize al Queda, I would be more apt to look at it seriously. Otherwise it just seems like sending good money after bad.