Do you agree with the experts that staying in Afghanistan is the right thing to do?

Unfortunately, unless we want to repeat the same vacuum we left in Iraq and the USSR left in, guess where, it is the right move. Now the numbers are up for debate. I realize NOBODY wants to be there, but I think we need more than 9-10,000 troops on the ground. Certainly more than the 5,500 CInC proposes.

SGT Ben Keen I think it is probably a good idea to announce that we care not drawing down and out of Afghanistan. Announcing our intention to draw-down our forces and exit by a date certain has previously courted disaster for the folks left behind who supported us.
I do not think it is time to cut and run from a military standpoint. We have many American citizens supporting various aspects of life in Afghanistan. Maintaining a force level while other Americans are helping out in groups such as Doctors Without Borders will help some of the younger generations realize there is hope for Afghanistan and that other people care about the Afghans. Building a sense of community within Afghanistan among the various groups and externally is an important step in the Afghans building stability within Afghanistan.
We should never publicize our intentions on drawdowns or operations. I was interested that POTUS mentioned the year he leaves office as the endpoint. Hopefully he will leave it up to his successor to determine the actual drawdown or ramp up as the case may be - military or civil.

Yes. However we may have to increase the number staying in order to mitigate the results of a premature drawdown that already occurred.

He learned from what ended up happening in Iraq. It sucks, but is a wise choice. But even with the troops being there, we need to have a viable end goal and exit strategy that would leave the Stan in position to support itself.

First of all, we need to define what the MISSION is...

What are our GOALS for accomplishing that MISSION?

What are the identifiable, quantifiable, and achievable benchmarks of SUCCESS?

What constitutes MISSION FAILURE?

At what point do we realize that the costs outweigh whatever benefit (goals) we are trying to achieve there?

To all those talking heads in government and the media who are in favor of continuing to send American Servicemembers into harms way, I ask you, WHEN ARE YOU GOING? For most of America has forgotten that we are still being shot at and killed over there. The president can declare an "end to hostilities," but if the bad guys don't recognize that, then we're only fooling ourselves and setting ourselves up for failure and loss.

Yes, I do... Stop reducing the numbers, return to the pre-Dec 14 numbers, and let us finish the job of enabling them to take care of their country. I've read too many posts about how we shouldn't police the world and such. Let's focus on the fact that we went into Afghanistan because they enabled and refused to give up those responsible for 9/11. So we went in by force, destroyed their governing capabilities and police/security force, and removed Al Qaeda's infrastructure within. As with the end of any war, it is our job to in turn rebuild their country. Ignoring that responsibility only ensures we will return in mass in the future.

It could take multiple generations to properly stabilize Afghanistan, if the American people can commit to that... then yes, we should stay and finish what we started. I'm not sure I believe we are willing to finish the job though, and if were not going to finish the job... we might as well leave immediately.

They need us... Though I for one am tired of putting other nations fires out when our own country needs so much attention.

Now, this is not a 'war', this is a 'conflict'. When the US declares war it is a congressional action and we go to win it. We have not 'won' a war since 1945. We have bled in conflicts, removed dictators to be replaced by even more brutal dictators....destabilized entire regions of the world....we turned our back on allies and abandoned millions to be murdered or 're-educated'. So, staying in the 'Stan would stop the Taliban from taking over Kabul, as long as we stayed. Is that worth the cost in blood and treasure? I say not, not until we declare war on radical Islam and eradicate that brand of Muslim from the face of the earth, we will be simply spending money, time and blood in a backward nation with people who do not care. As a Vietnam vet, I identify totally with frustration of having the guts, will and courage to go whip their ass...and yet presidents lacking the political will to call evil, evil and let us finish the job. We left no traces of fascism in Italy, squashed National Socialism in Germany, uprooted Emperor deification in Japan....and we would have to disband Islam at it's core - Medina and Mecca to stop this foolishness. Simply replacing one little despot with another will never, ever work.

In 2010, I would've said no...after seeing Iraq crumble? Now, I'm inclined to agree that this is a "must"...unless we are willing to walk off and let the world burn. Iran didn't waste any time breaking their word...so giving up key strategic locations in the event of conflict seems unwise as well.

If I were sitting on Pennsylvania Avenue? I'd sign an immediate agreement with the Russian Federation for cooperation in putting down ISIS and allowing Assad to keep his job in exchange for a commitment to keep out of Turkey. Sign a clear, un-ambiguous commitment to defense with Israel in exchange for putting an infantry division with supporting armor near the Golan Heights. Let the Saudis think that one over a long time. Do what the Macedonians, British and Russians failed to do...make Afghanistan an independent territory of the United States and give them overseas manufacturing. Inculcate the ANA/ANP into the US military similar to British Indian Contingent...That should take care of the Taliban. Let the Chinese worry about how they intend to collect. Put the 101st in Kabul, and a permanent air wing at Bagram.

Put (if they're not their already) a rotating strategic ballistic missile submarine presence within range to hit Tehran before they could get their birds off the ground. If they twitch...take out anything remotely nuclear with conventional from stealth that night.