Should we send more troops into Afghanistan?

That's a difficult question, one of many President Obama is facing in the early months of his administration--how to deal with Iran, Palestine, Pakistan, Afghanistan, North Korea, the recession, not to mention health care reform. I'm not sure what the answer to your question is. I lean toward not sending more troops until our objectives are more clearly defined, and the cost in lives and money of attaining them, how long it will take, what the likelihood of attaining them is and what other alternatives are under consideration are clarified.

One of the most worrisome concerns is what the implications for Pakistan would be if we bailed out of Afghanistan. It may be that the current non-sectarian government may be driven out by religious fanatics who would foment more trouble or war with India. The group that sent the terrorists to attack Mumbai, Lashkar e Taiba, is still functioning in Pakistan according to this morning's NY Times.

I think that depends very much on who "we" are. :).

As a veteran of the Iraqi war, I think Afghanistan got the short straw. I'm not saying that we should not have focused on Iraq, but Afghanistan, sort of, got left behind. In my opinion, there should have been just as many soldiers in Afghan as there were in Iraq.

With the big "push" into Iraq, everyone forgot about Afghanistan. The media, civilians, even I could go days without thinking about the country at all. In my opinion, there should be more soldiers in Afghan, and hopefully the President will do the right thing.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.