Steve, I read the Wikipedia summary and didn't come away with a compelling feeling that we should be there, spending hundreds of billions of dollars a year for an Afghanistan war, particularly when we do have other compelling needs here at home (healthcare, education, and many other domestic needs).

We committed troops to Afghanistan to quell Taliban control because they were reportedly harboring al Quaeda after the 9-11 attack. While we have been inconsistent in the deployment of troops to this theatre, we have had some success in killing some al Quaeda leaders. We have had little success in controlling the Taliban, who now control at least half the coiuntry and are even threatening Kabul, the capital city. al Quaeda has effectively sought refuge on the Pakistan side of the Pakistan-Afghanistan border and our "ally", Pakistan, has done little to eliminate them. Other than using missle equipped-drones, we have opted not to deploy troops on the ground in Pakistan, who has objected to any such idea.

We're facing the same frustrating situation that many occupiers before us have faced in Afghanistan. All who have preceded us have failed and withdrawn, the latest being the Russians in 1988 after an unsuccessful ten-year war which has become know as "Russia's Viet Nam".

I've got to do more research on why we think we need to be waging war in Afghanistan and spending boatloads of money to re-build the country. It's not as if we don't have other issues here at home that could be substantially resolved with the money we're spending in Afghanistan.