I think I understand RGS's position.

If we abandon the role of overseeing Afghanistan, it becomes a haven for international terrorists who WILL make it their business to attack us worldwide.

After all, isn't that what prompted us to invade to begin with?

Thinking of Afghanistan as a nation, rather that what it apparently is, a wild land, one with no real central government, one run by primative warlords and rule by the sword, is the problem.

The fact is that we do not even have the ability to prevent Afghanistan from being the number 1 source (90%, I'm told) of the world's opium.

Now, if we cannot even prevent the culture of gigantic fields of opium poppies, one wonders how effectively we can surpress the much less obvious terrorist activity in that land.

But I do NOT wonder why we might WANT to stop international terrorists from making that wild land a haven for their activities.

Not one bit.

I only wonder if it even possible to do that?