Analysis: For Obama, could 10,000 troops in Afghanistan be too many?

[unhappycamper]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/26/us-usa-afghanistan-idUSBRE8AP19620121126

Analysis: For Obama, could 10,000 troops in Afghanistan be too many?
By Phil Stewart
WASHINGTON | Mon Nov 26, 2012 6:01pm EST

(Reuters) - President Barack Obama publicly scoffed at the idea of keeping 10,000 troops in Iraq. So could he really be persuaded to keep that many in Afghanistan after the war formally ends in 2014?

The 10,000 figure is well within a preliminary range put forward by the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, General John Allen, and which is informing deliberations by the Obama administration, one U.S. official said.

But the optics could be tricky for Obama, who must balance his promise to end the war in Afghanistan in 2014 with the need to keep enough forces there to prevent the destabilization of the country and a return of al Qaeda. He also must get Kabul to agree.

"As long as (U.S. troops) are in a war zone and putting their lives on the line, it's hard for any president to say the war is over," said Juan Zarate, a former counterterrorism adviser to President George W. Bush and a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.



unhappycamper comment: If we figure these 10,000 unfortunates cost $1 million a year (fully loaded since we are paying at least 70% of NATO costs and most of the bill for the 100+ thousand contractors currently in Afghanistan), no.

[Lasher]

1. One is too many for me.

And yesterday isn't soon enough to get them out.

[Magoo48]

2. Exactly

[rachel1]

3. They should've never been deployed to Afghanistan

but as long as there are people who believe the hoax of establishing democracy and defending freedom and security (which is just a guise for MIC to plunder the country) the troops will remain there and anti-US sentiment will increase further.