Before I put in my two cents on Afghanistan I must detour to Obama's Nobel Peace Prize. The other evening I was threatened with a sledge hammer and called a self-hating black person, a secret Republican, and a traitor "to the cause", not only because of my opinion on the prize, but also supposedly gleaned from being "researched on the web", which I assume primarily means entries to this site. I must edit myself more carefully because I didn't know I had, and never intended, to project any of those things.

I can best express my Obama opinion with the following analogy. Let us consider two Roman Emperors, Caligula and Marcus Aurelius, but hold in our consciousnesses that many say the award to Obama is actually an anti-Bush statement. I can understand that many Romans, and the world, would attach a degree of wonderfulness to Aurelius, simply because he isn't Caligula. But even though ideas on ethics and behavior may be percolating inside, I still hold that UNTIL Aurelius actually writes and lives "Meditations"; he is just the 'next' guy. Talk is cheap, unless inflation and the devalued dollar make it worth 1.4 mill. Nonetheless, I have the audacity to hope Mr. Obama will have the courage to be worthy of the honor.

As to Afghanistan, there are so many varying opinions, I ultimately only feel comfortable keeping my own counsel. When I look at a map of the region I see a land of extremely rough terrain the size of Texas. From what I garner from books and the electronic media, the people of Afghanistan are at least the equal in knuckle headedness to Texans. That being the case I don't think 100,000 troops are going to be sufficient to the task. Multiples of 100,000 will be necessary to begin to force a nation of Sunni Muslims, with a dozen ethnicities, speaking twenty different languages, a history of pseudo-primitive tribalism, and a faux central government so corrupt it would make the minions involved with Ballot Box 13 humble, into a workable tool for U.S. geo-political interests. If to this you add the fact the neighbors bordering Afghanistan are Iran, Russia, and Pakistan, any of which will treat with the devil, let alone the Taliban, to knock the U.S. down a notch. Additionally, we are told by senior military and political leaders there is no Al-Qaeda left in Afghanistan. Supposedly our beef with this rag-tag pseudo-military outfit is why we invaded. If they are no longer there, we're left to fight the Taliban for hegemony in Afghanistan. My understanding is that the Taliban are largely composed of Pashtu's, the predominate ethnic group, and their opposition to American presence and influence in founded is a conception of Afghan nationalism more Pashtu than Cheneyian. If all this is true, I say withdraw and let them have their nation. If this is truly a war about 9/11 and not the Caspian region's natural gas and a pipeline traversing Afghanistan that the West has been salivating over for more than a hundred years, the very thing the Soviets coveted, and if Al Qaeda is gone, let's not waste lives and treasure making enemies of innocent Afghan people. Since it is unlikely, even if the Taliban assumes control, they will invade Iran, or be so foolish to attack Russia, it makes sense to focus our attention on Pakistan. We must invest our powers of persuasion in convincing them of the Taliban intention to undermine and overthrow their regime. It this is accomplished it should be possible to convince our leaders and theirs, that it is in the best interests of all for our troops to withdraw from a useless exercise in Afghanistan and be put to more advantageous use in the hinterlands of Pakistan, where the festering cancer of terrorism and insurrection is fomenting. Once Pakistan is able to assert active control of this area and can maintain its own national security, we may be able to do the unthinkable and finally ship troops the other way - home.