It was the second major assault in Kabul in less than three weeks and highlighted the Taliban's continued ability to strike in the heavily guarded capital even when security had been tightened for Obama's visit and Wednesday's anniversary of the killing of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden in neighboring Pakistan.

At this vist, Obama and Karzai signed an agreement that will allow the U.S. to keep troops in Afghanistan at least through 2024, but in a more limited capacity and specifically for training Afghan troops and for targeted operations against al-Qaida. Obama also vowed to ask Congress for money for Afghanistan every year. The article points out that the killings right after Obama left sends the message that any reform in Afghanistan is going to be difficult (duh) and maybe impossible. So, the question remains: do we stay in Afghanistan or do we just get out? What are our real (i.e., non partisan, non ideological) options at this time?

May 2, 2012 -- 9:32AM, teilhard wrote:

I am not optimistic about the Future of Afghanistan ...

Agreed. I'd be willing to bet that Obama isn't either, but he can't really say that in his role.

Obama pulled off a neat disappearing trick in his little speechette last night.

He identified the enemy and the reason we're over there as al Qaida, and said nothing about the Taliban.

This was pretty clever, since al Qaida is a dying organization and the Taliban is going to win in Afghanistan. Anybody who thinks about this war for more than two seconds knows this.

The reason they're going to win is because they live there and we don't.