Quote Originally Posted by Dayuhan View Post
What would you have us do, annex Afghanistan as the 51st state and govern the place ourselves? Sooner or later they have to stand on their own, at which point it ceases to be our responsibility and becomes theirs. If we wait for them to be fully ready that will never happen, because as long as we're their they have no incentive to get fully ready.
Ah yes, the ever reliable fallacy of the false alternative.

Quote Originally Posted by Dayuhan View Post
As far as bringing people with us goes, how do you propose to distinguish between those who are at risk from working with us and those who just want a ticket on the gravy train?
You're right. It would be just too hard. That is always a good reason not to do what you should do. It's hard.

Quote Originally Posted by Dayuhan View Post
It was done briefly, at a time when everybody expected access would eventually be restored, as it was. That doesn't mean it would be sustainable.
It would be if you reduced your force level. Doesn't matter now though. Too late. And of course it would have been hard to do, always a good reason not to do something.

Quote Originally Posted by Dayuhan View Post
Even without the access issue, options for dealing with Pakistan are limited. We could top giving them money, but that wouldn't stop them from doing what they believe is in their interest. All very well to rant about "fixing" or "doing something", but what exactly do you propose to do?
Asked and answered on many occasions.

Quote Originally Posted by Dayuhan View Post
Did anyone make a promise? Who? When? To whom? Did this hypothetical promise involve eternal support and security?
You can go back to JMM99's post, print it out and wave that piece of paper around when you use this argument. It will work good.