Editing Opposition to the War in Afghanistan (2001–2021)

{{Short description|none}} <!-- "none" is preferred when the title is already sufficiently detailed; see [[WP:SDNONE]] -->

'''Opposition to the [[War in Afghanistan (2001–2021)]]''' stems from numerous factors, including the view that the [[United States invasion of Afghanistan]] was [[#Disputed legality of the NATO invasion|illegal]]{{Broken anchor|date=2024-06-03|bot=User:Cewbot/log/20201008/configuration|target_link=#Disputed legality of the NATO invasion|reason= }} under international law and constituted an unjustified aggression, the view that the continued military presence constitutes a [[#Foreign military occupation|foreign military occupation]], the view that the war [[#Rejection of the terrorism argument|does little to prevent terrorism but increases its likelihood]], and views on the involvement of [[#Geo-political and corporate interests|geo-political and corporate interests]]. Also giving rise to opposition to the war are [[#Afghan civilian casualties|civilian casualties]], the [[#Financial cost of the war to taxpayers and Western economies|cost to taxpayers]], and [[#Length of the war|the length of the war]] to date.

Opponents of the war{{who|date=May 2024}} have claimed that the attack on Afghanistan was illegal under [[international law]], constituted unjustified [[War of aggression|aggression]] and would lead to the deaths of many civilians through the bombing campaign and by preventing [[humanitarian aid]] workers from bringing food into the country. By [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1740538.stm one estimate], around 5,000 Afghan civilians had been killed within just the first three months of the U.S. invasion.<ref name="guardian_stopafghanwar">{{cite news |last=Vidal |first=John |title=Another coalition stands up to be counted |work=The Guardian |date=November 19, 2001 |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk_news/story/0,,597160,00.html |access-date=November 11, 2006}}</ref><ref name="bbc_stopafghanwar">{{cite news |title=Protesters demand end to bombing |publisher=BBC |date=November 10, 2001 |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/1648479.stm|access-date=November 11, 2006}}</ref>

{{quote|[[The UN Charter]] is a treaty ratified by the United States and thus part of US law. Under the charter, a country can use armed force against another country only in self-defense or when the Security Council approves. Neither of those conditions was met before the United States invaded Afghanistan. The Taliban did not attack us on 9/11. Nineteen men – 15 from [[Saudi Arabia]] – did, and there was no imminent threat that Afghanistan would attack the US or another UN member country. The council did not authorize the United States or any other country to use military force against Afghanistan. The US war in Afghanistan is illegal.| [[Marjorie Cohn]], professor at [[Thomas Jefferson School of Law]], president of the [[National Lawyers Guild]]<ref name="Afghanistan: Where Empires Go to Die">{{cite web|url=http://www.truthout.org/091709R|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090922201607/http://www.truthout.org/091709R|url-status=dead|archive-date=22 September 2009|title=Afghanistan: Where Empires Go to Die|author=Anonymous|publisher=Truthout|access-date=6 February 2015}}</ref>|source=}}

Several weeks into a massive US-led military offensive against the Taliban in four southern Afghan provinces in 2006, Afghan President [[Hamid Karzai]] spoke against the killing of so many Afghan citizens:<ref>{{cite web|url=https://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=2107531&page=1|title=Afghan Problem 'a Lot Deeper Than Bin Laden'|publisher=ABC News|author=Keith Garvin |date=22 June 2006|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{quote|It is not acceptable for us that in all this fighting, Afghans are dying. In the last three to four weeks, 500 to 600 Afghans were killed. [Even] if they are Taliban, they are sons of this land.

| Afghan President [[Hamid Karzai]] on June 22, 2006<ref name="rawa_usattack" />}}

According to journalist [[Ahmed Rashid]], the noted author of several books on Afghanistan, the [[Taliban]] are in the fabric of that country, and defeating the Taliban would involve killing "large numbers of Pashtuns", an ethnic group with a long history in southeastern Afghanistan.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wbur.org/npr/123777455|title=Ahmed Rashid Offers An Update On The Taliban|date=February 17, 2010|publisher=WBUR|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

One of the best-known women's organization in Afghanistan, the [[Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan]] (RAWA), condemned the US invasion of Afghanistan, stating that "America ... has launched a vast aggression on our country".

They accused the US and its allies of "paying the least attention to the fate of democracy in Afghanistan" by first having supported for years a "Jehadis-fostering, Osama-fostering and Taliban-fostering" policy before the 2001 US invasion, only to now be "sharpening the dagger of the [[Afghan Northern Alliance|Northern Alliance]]" warlords and drug lords that were key allies of the U.S. in its invasion.<ref name="rawa_usattack">{{cite web |title=Taliban should be overthrown by the uprising of Afghan nation |author=RAWA |date=October 11, 2001 |url=http://www.rawa.org/us-strikes.htm |access-date=November 11, 2006}}</ref><ref name="The US has Returned Fundamentalism to Afghanistan">{{cite web|url=http://www.dominionpaper.ca/articles/1148|title=The US has Returned Fundamentalism to Afghanistan|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{quote|Our people have been caught in the claws of the monster of a vast war and destruction.&nbsp;... The continuation of US attacks and the increase in the number of innocent civilian victims not only gives an excuse to the Taliban, but also will cause the empowering of the fundamentalist forces in the region and even in the world.| RAWA, Afghan women fighting for human rights and for social justice in Afghanistan, October 11, 2001<ref name="rawa_usattack"/>}}

==Afghan civilian casualties==

{{main|Civilian casualties in the war in Afghanistan (2001–2021)}}

==Coalition military casualties==

{{main|Coalition casualties in Afghanistan}}

The continued and mounting death tolls of foreign military forces in the decade-long war are another factor involved in the opposition to the war in Afghanistan, with hundreds currently dying per year. By October 2011, the 10th anniversary of the U.S. invasion, over 2,750 foreign soldiers had been killed in the war in Afghanistan.<ref>[http://icasualties.org/oef iCasualties.org Afghanistan coalition military fatalities]</ref><ref name="US had 'frighteningly simplistic' view of Afghanistan, says McChrystal">{{cite web|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB125382797428838875?mod=googlenews_wsj|title=U.S. Allies Await Afghan Review|author1=Stephen Fidler |author2=John W. Miller |name-list-style=amp |date=September 25, 2009|work=Wall Street Journal|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/oct/07/us-frighteningly-simplistic-afghanistan-mcchrystal?newsfeed=true|title=US had 'frighteningly simplistic' view of Afghanistan, says McChrystal|author=Declan Walsh|work=The Guardian|date=October 7, 2011 |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

[[File:Coalition military casualties in afghanistan by month.svg|thumb|600px|none|Coalition fatalities per month since the war began in October 2001 as U.S. "Operation Enduring Freedom".<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.icasualties.org/oef/ |title=Operation Enduring Freedom icasualties.org |access-date=November 9, 2010 |archive-date=April 6, 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100406083558/http://icasualties.org/oef/ |url-status=dead }}</ref>]]

International public opinion is largely opposed to the war in Afghanistan. Polls around the world – including a 47-nation global survey in 2007, a 24-nation survey in 2008, both a 25-nation survey and a 13-nation survey in 2009, and a 22-nation survey in 2010 – have repeatedly shown considerable opposition to the presence of US and NATO military troops in Afghanistan.<ref name="Global Unease With Major World Powers">{{cite web|url=http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=256|title=Global Unease With Major World Powers|date=June 27, 2007|work=Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="24-Nation Pew Global Attitudes Project Survey">{{cite web|url=http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=260|title=Global Economic Gloom – China and India Notable Exceptions|date=June 12, 2008|publisher=Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="25-Nation Pew Global Attitudes Survey, 2009, p.39 (PDF p.43)">{{Cite web |url=http://www.pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/264.pdf |title=25-Nation Pew Global Attitudes Survey, 2009, p.39 (PDF p.43) |access-date=September 20, 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091211115104/http://pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/264.pdf |archive-date=December 11, 2009 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref name="Pew2010">{{cite web|url=http://pewglobal.org/2010/06/17/obama-more-popular-abroad-than-at-home/2/#chapter-1-views-of-the-u-s-and-american-foreign-policy|title=Obama More Popular Abroad Than At Home, Global Image of U.S. Continues to Benefit|date=June 17, 2010|work=Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

While support for the war in Afghanistan has been strongest in the United States and [[Israel]],<ref name="47-Nation Pew Global Attitudes Survey p.24, p.116">{{Cite web |url=http://pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/256.pdf |title=47-Nation Pew Global Attitudes Survey p.24, p.116 |access-date=September 20, 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100112094725/http://pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/256.pdf |archive-date=January 12, 2010 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref name="25-Nation Pew Global Attitudes Survey, 2009, p.22 Opposition to War in Afghanistan">{{Cite web |url=http://www.pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/264.pdf |title=25-Nation Pew Global Attitudes Survey, 2009, p.22 (PDF p.26) Opposition to War in Afghanistan |access-date=September 20, 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091211115104/http://pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/264.pdf |archive-date=December 11, 2009 |url-status=dead }}</ref> recent polls have shown growing American opposition to the U.S. war, including majority opposition:

{{quote|If Americans pulled back and started paying attention to this war, it would become even less popular.|A senior advisor to US General [[Stanley McChrystal]], from [https://web.archive.org/web/20100624014247/http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236/ the June 2010 article] that resulted in his dismissal as commander of all foreign military forces in Afghanistan.<ref name="The Runaway General"/><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jun/22/obama-general-stanley-mccrystal-afghanistan|title=General alarm as Barack Obama summons Stanley McChrystal to the White House|author=Chris McGreal|work=the Guardian|date=June 22, 2010 |access-date=6 February 2015}}</ref>}}

The ongoing decade-long [[War in Afghanistan (2001–2021)|War in Afghanistan]] has repeatedly been the subject of large protests around the world, with the first large-scale demonstrations beginning in the days leading up to the war's official launch on October 7, 2001 as US "Operation Enduring Freedom".

==Foreign military occupation==

{{quote|If the populations of Afghanistan and the NATO countries were able to vote on this military occupation it could not continue indefinitely, and peace would finally be within reach.| [[Malalai Joya]], Member of the Afghan Parliament, August 19, 2009<ref name="Why Afghans have no hope in this week's vote">[http://stopwar.org.uk/content/view/1441/1/Why Afghans have no hope in this week's vote]</ref>{{better source needed|date=April 2013}}}}

In January 2009, an independent analysis by the [[Carnegie Endowment for International Peace]] in Washington, D.C. claimed that "the majority of Afghans are now deeply opposed to the foreign troops on their soil" and that the presence of a foreign force in Afghanistan is the single most important factor behind the Afghan insurgency.<ref name="Who's Afraid of A Terrorist Haven?"/><ref name="Focus and Exit: An Alternative Strategy for the Afghan War"/><ref name="A flawed strategy and a failed war in Afghanistan"/> However, according to a May 2009 BBC poll, 69% of Afghans surveyed thought it was at least mostly good that the U.S. military came into remove the Taliban<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/05_02_09afghan_poll_2009.pdf |title=Afghan Poll 2009 |access-date=August 3, 2011 |work=BBC News}}</ref> and in a June 2009 [[The Gallup Organization|Gallup]] survey found that about half of Afghan respondents felt that additional U.S. forces would help stabilize the security situation.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gallup.com/poll/123335/Nearly-Half-Afghans-Think-Troops-Help.aspx |title=Gallup poll |publisher=Gallup.com |date=September 30, 2009 |access-date=August 3, 2011}}</ref>

On October 8, 2009, in a New York Times interview initiated by the White House, a senior White House official described the Afghan [[Taliban]] as an indigenous Afghan group that want to win back territory within their own country. The White House comment had come a day after the Taliban reasserted that their aim is "the obtainment of independence".<ref name="US may shift Afghan war tactics: report">[https://web.archive.org/web/20091012072851/http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iH1WgxXpLu_caX4-aqObScOIxtVA US may shift Afghan war tactics: report]</ref>

==Foreign military raids of Afghan homes==

A key and long-standing point of opposition to the war in Afghanistan has been the constant raids of Afghan homes by foreign military forces that have persisted despite long-repeated pleas and protests by the Afghan government.<ref name="Many in Afghanistan oppose Obama's troop buildup plans">[http://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/print/content/view/print/242836 Many in Afghanistan oppose Obama's troop buildup plans]</ref><ref name="Rethinking the Afghanistan Mission">{{cite web|url=http://www.cigionline.org/blogs/2007/7/rethinking-afghanistan-mission|title=Rethinking the Afghanistan Mission|access-date=February 6, 2015|archive-date=February 7, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150207035744/https://www.cigionline.org/blogs/2007/7/rethinking-afghanistan-mission|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref name="Karzai Asks U.S.-Led Coalition To Change Strategy Against Terrorism">{{cite web|url=http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2005/09/mil-050921-rferl01.htm|title=Afghanistan: Karzai Asks U.S.-Led Coalition To Change Strategy Against Terrorism|author=John Pike|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="Afghanistan: Chaos Central">{{cite web|url=http://mondediplo.com/2009/02/16talibans|title=Afghanistan: chaos central|date=February 2009 |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="Afghan leader sends demands to U.S. on troop conduct">{{cite web|url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-12-18-afghan-troops_N.htm|title=Afghan leader sends demands to U.S. on troop conduct - USATODAY.com|website=[[USA Today]] |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="Karzai wants U.S. to reduce military operations in Afghanistan">{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/13/AR2010111304001.html|title=Karzai wants U.S. to reduce military operations in Afghanistan|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="Afghans Want a Deal on Foreign Troops">{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/26/world/asia/26afghan.html|title=Afghans Want a Deal on Foreign Troops|date=August 26, 2008|work=The New York Times|access-date=May 25, 2016}}</ref><ref name="Some Truth About Afghanistan">{{cite web|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-margolis/please-mr-president-some-_b_799285.html|title=Please Mr. President! Some Truth About Afghanistan|work=The Huffington Post|date=December 20, 2010 |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

In a visit to Washington in May 2005, Afghan President [[Hamid Karzai]] asked U.S. President [[George W. Bush]] to let the Afghan government have authority over house search operations regularly conducted by the U.S.-led foreign military forces in his country. Bush rejected the Afghan president's request.<ref name="Karzai Asks U.S.-Led Coalition To Change Strategy Against Terrorism"/>

In September 2005, Karzai again tried asking the US-led military forces for changes, saying: "Going into the Afghan homes – searching Afghan homes without the authorization of the Afghan government – is something that should stop now. No coalition forces should go into Afghan homes without the authorization of the Afghan government."<ref name="Karzai Asks U.S.-Led Coalition To Change Strategy Against Terrorism"/>

By the spring of 2006, mounting anger over the foreign military raids of Afghan homes, and accusations of foreign troops molesting women during the forced searches, helped prompt Afghan religious leaders to begin calling for armed resistance.<ref name="Afghanistan: Chaos Central"/>

In a December 2008 speech, Afghan President Hamid Karzai said that in the previous month he had again asked that the U.S. military in his country cooperate with his government, sending the U.S. government a list of demands about troop conduct in his country: "Part of that list was that they shouldn't, on their own, enter the houses of our people and bombard our villages and detain our people." He gave no indication of having received any response back from the U.S.<ref name="Afghan leader sends demands to U.S. on troop conduct"/>

In November 2010, he yet again repeated his protest during a [https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/13/AR2010111304001.html Washington Post interview]: "The raids are a problem always. They were a problem then, they are a problem now. They have to go away. The Afghan people don't like these raids, if there is any raid it has to be done by the Afghan government within the Afghan laws. This is a continuing disagreement between us."<ref name="Karzai wants U.S. to reduce military operations in Afghanistan"/>

==Destruction of Afghan homes and crops==

In 2010, US-led offensives inflicted more than $100 million in damage to Afghan homes and fruit crops in southern [[Kandahar province]], according to an Afghan government report in January 2011. The government delegation led by President Hamid Karzai's advisor said that the foreign military forces had inflicted unreasonable damage and caused the displacement of many people.<ref name="Some Truth About Afghanistan"/><ref name="Natooffensive">[http://www.worldbulletin.net/news_print.php?id=68451 Nato offensive inflicts Afghans $100 mln damage in Kandahar]</ref>

Two months earlier, in November 2010, the Afghan Rights Monitor (ARM), a human rights group, also reported widespread damage of Afghan homes in the same three districts, [[Arghandab District|Arghandab]], [[Zhari]], and [[Panjwai]], where tens of thousands of foreign forces had been carrying out military offensives over the past year.<ref name="Some Truth About Afghanistan"/><ref name="Natooffensive" />

==Rejection of the terrorism argument==

A decade into the war, the Pew Research Center reported in September 2011 that the majority 75% of Americans do not think the war in Afghanistan has lessened the risk of terrorism in their country, and only a minority 25% thought it had. Far more Americans, the plurality 37%, think the U.S. war in Afghanistan has in fact increased the likelihood of terrorist attacks in the U.S.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://people-press.org/2011/09/01/united-in-remembrance-divided-over-policies/|title=United in Remembrance, Divided over Policies|date=September 1, 2011|work=Pew Research Center for the People and the Press|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>[http://people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/9-1-11%20Sept.%2011%20Release.pdf Pew Research Center poll August 2011]</ref>

In 2004, Jack Cloonan, a 25-year veteran of the FBI who served between 1996 and 2002 on the joint CIA-FBI task force that tracked bin Laden, said the number of people in Al Qaeda was "minuscule". A membership list found near Kabul in 2001 during the US invasion of Afghanistan, and obtained by the task force, showed there had been a grand total of 198 members in the organization.<ref name="The Al Qaeda Clubhouse: Members lacking">{{Cite web |url=http://www.harpers.org/archive/2006/07/sb-al-qaeda-new-members-badly-needed-1151963690 |title=The Al Qaeda Clubhouse: Members lacking |access-date=June 28, 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100110125128/http://www.harpers.org/archive/2006/07/sb-al-qaeda-new-members-badly-needed-1151963690 |archive-date=January 10, 2010 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

With the US invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, al Qaeda elements moved to Pakistan and other countries.<ref name="The Al Qaeda Clubhouse: Members lacking"/><ref name="CRS20100205">[https://fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/R41070.pdf Al Qaeda and Affiliates – Historical Perspective, Global Presence, and Implications for US Policy (Congressional Research Service, February 5, 2010)]</ref><ref name="CIA: At most, 50-100 Al Qaeda in Afghanistan">{{cite web|url=http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/06/cia-at-most-50100-al-qaeda-in-afghanistan.html|title=CIA: At most, 50-100 Al Qaeda in Afghanistan|author=ABC News|work=ABC News Blogs|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{quote|The al Qaeda presence [in Afghanistan] is very diminished. The maximum estimate is less than 100 operating in the country, no bases, no ability to launch attacks on either us or our allies.| U.S. National Security Adviser, General [[James L. Jones]], October 4, 2009<ref name="CRS20100205"/><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/05/afghan-attacks-add-to-call-for-more-troops//print/|title=Obama aide downplays extra troops in Afghanistan|website=[[The Washington Times]] |access-date=6 February 2015}}</ref>}}

On October 8, 2009, in a New York Times interview initiated by the White House, a senior White House official acknowledged that there are fewer than 100 [[al-Qaida]] fighters left in Afghanistan and that the Afghan [[Taliban]], an indigenous Afghan group seeking to win back territory within their own country, do not themselves pose a direct security threat to the United States. He said: "When the two are aligned, it's mainly on the tactical front."<ref name="US may shift Afghan war tactics: report"/>

The comments were made a day after the Taliban asserted that it did not pose a direct threat to the United States. The Taliban stated that their aim was "obtainment of independence and establishment of an Islamic system" in their country, and not to attack the West. "We did not have any agenda to harm other countries, including Europe, nor do we have such agenda today."<ref name="US may shift Afghan war tactics: report"/>

On June 27, 2010, CIA Director [[Leon Panetta]] revealed that there were possibly fewer than 50 members of Al Qaeda, and at most 100, in Afghanistan.<ref name="CIA: At most, 50-100 Al Qaeda in Afghanistan"/>

{{quote|... The estimate on the number of Al Qaeda [in Afghanistan] is actually relatively small. At most, we're looking at 50 to 100, maybe less. ... There's no question that the main location of Al Qaeda is in the tribal areas of Pakistan.| CIA Director [[Leon Panetta]], June 27, 2010<ref name="Some Truth About Afghanistan"/><ref name="CIA: At most, 50-100 Al Qaeda in Afghanistan"/>}}

In January 2009, an independent analysis by the [[Carnegie Endowment for International Peace]] in Washington, D.C. dismissed the argument that a withdrawal of the foreign military presence would allow al-Qaeda to operate in Afghanistan, pointing out that, first, the US-led military forces do not control the periphery of the Afghan territory anyway, and, second, that targeted operations with the agreement of the Kabul government could be used instead.<ref name="Focus and Exit: An Alternative Strategy for the Afghan War">[http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/afghan_war-strategy.pdf Focus and Exit: An Alternative Strategy for the Afghan War]</ref>

Others have also made the point that al-Qaeda operates in many other countries and simply does not need Afghanistan. The [[New York Times]] [https://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/washington/10military.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=all reported] in November 2008 that a 2004 classified order identified at least 15 to 20 other countries outside of Afghanistan and Iraq where al-Qaeda militants were believed to be operating or to have sanctuary. The countries listed in the secret order signed by US Defense Secretary [[Donald H. Rumsfeld]] with the approval of US President [[George W. Bush]] included Syria, Pakistan, [[Yemen]], Saudi Arabia and several other Persian Gulf states. Since 2004, the United States has repeatedly used the broad, secret authority granted by that order to conduct targeted operations against al-Qaeda and other militants in many countries outside of Afghanistan, including Somalia, Ethiopia, Syria, Pakistan, Yemen, Kenya, the Philippines, and elsewhere.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/washington/10military.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=all|title=Secret Order Lets U.S. Raid Al Qaeda|work=The New York Times |date=November 10, 2008 |access-date=February 6, 2015 |last1=Schmitt |first1=Eric |last2=Mazzetti |first2=Mark }}</ref><ref>[http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/eric_margolis/2010/01/03/12329996-sun.html U.S. kicks hornet's nest in Yemen]</ref><ref>[http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/eric_margolis/2010/01/10/12408811-sun.html Old threat rings true today]</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/jan/27/only-pressure-withdraw-stop-blood-price|title=Only pressure to withdraw can stop this blood price|author=Seumas Milne|work=the Guardian|date=January 27, 2010 |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="The Afghan War Moves South">{{cite web|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-margolis/the-afghan-war-moves-sout_b_749232.html|title=The Afghan War Moves South|work=The Huffington Post|date=October 5, 2010 |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{See also|Al-Qaeda involvement in Africa|Al-Qaeda involvement in Europe|Al-Qaeda involvement in the Middle East|Al Qaeda Network Exord}}

{{quote|If U.S. forces are there to prevent reestablishment of al-Qaeda bases – evidently there are none now – must there be nation-building invasions of Somalia, Yemen and other sovereignty vacuums?| Conservative pundit [[George Will]], September 1, 2009<ref name="Time to Get Out of Afghanistan"/>}}

U.S. Vice President [[Joe Biden]] and a number of other senior administration officials also favor moving toward a more scaled-back strategy that focuses on targeted, surgical operations against senior insurgent figures using drones and small special operations teams.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/27/AR2009092703155_pf.html|title=NATO Officials Say They Will Back Afghan Effort to Turn Insurgents Against Taliban|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB125435650569454583?mod=googlenews_wsj|title=Gates Doubts U.S.'s Afghan Strategy|author=Yochi J. Dreazen|date=October 1, 2009|work=WSJ|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/30/world/asia/30policy.html|title=From McChrystal's Mouth to Obama's Ear|date=September 30, 2009|work=The New York Times|access-date=May 25, 2016}}</ref><ref name="Advisers split complicates Obama's Afghan decision">[https://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iqyaFh_efr-brDq0rMLF1hkop0tgD9B25A1O0 Advisers split complicates Obama's Afghan decision]{{dead link|date=June 2024|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}</ref>

Others have further made the point that [[al-Qaeda]] does not need a safe haven at all, and that terrorists can and have learned their craft in a [[Hamburg]] apartment, a home in [[Colorado]], a flight school in [[Florida]], or myriad other places around the world.<ref name="Who's Afraid of A Terrorist Haven?"/><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/will-obama-abandon-afghanistan-1.806790|title=Will Obama abandon Afghanistan?|date=September 23, 2009|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="West should vote with its feet">{{cite news |url=http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10597268&pnum=0 |title=West should vote with its feet |author=Dyer, Gwynne |author-link=Gwynne Dyer |date=September 15, 2009 |work=[[The New Zealand Herald]] |access-date=November 1, 2011}}</ref>

As noted military historian [[Gwynne Dyer]] pointed out, "The 9/11 attacks were not planned in Afghanistan. They were planned by al Qaeda operatives in Germany and Florida, and it is very unlikely that the Taleban government of Afghanistan had advance warning of them."<ref name="West should vote with its feet"/>

{{quote|I find specious the reasons we ask for bloodshed and sacrifice from our young men and women in Afghanistan. If honest, our stated strategy of securing Afghanistan to prevent al-Qaeda resurgence or regrouping would require us to additionally invade and occupy western Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, etc.&nbsp;... The September 11th attacks, as well as the Madrid and London bombings, were primarily planned and organized in Western Europe; a point that highlights the threat is not one tied to traditional geographic or political boundaries.

In a September 30, 2009 [http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091019/polk open letter to President Obama], foreign policy veteran [[William R. Polk]] stated: "Since terrorist attacks can be mounted from many places, the only effective long-term defense against them is to deal with their causes."<ref name="An Open Letter to President Obama"/>

{{quote|The Al Qaeda network today also comprises semi-autonomous or self radicalized actors, who often have only peripheral or ephemeral ties to either the core cadre in Pakistan or affiliated groups elsewhere. According to U.S. officials Al Qaeda cells and associates are located in over 70 countries.| Congressional Research Service report, February 5, 2010<ref name="CRS20100205"/>}}

When asked by [[Bob Woodward]] why al-Qaeda, which is comparatively safe in its current sanctuaries in Pakistan, would even want to return to Afghanistan, the [[National Security Advisor (United States)|National Security Adviser]] of the United States, General [[James L. Jones]], replied, "That's a good question.&nbsp;... This is certainly one of the questions that we will be discussing. This is one of the questions, for example, that one could come back at with General McChrystal."<ref name="Obama to Reassess Afghanistan War">{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/26/AR2009092602685_pf.html|title=No Deadline Set for Decision on Troops|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

===Creating and training insurgents===

According to the Carnegie report, the insurgency against the foreign military forces would abate with the removal of foreign troops from Afghanistan, and "the momentum of the Taliban would slow or stop altogether, because without a foreign occupier the Jihadist and nationalist feelings of the population would be much more difficult to mobilize."<ref name="Focus and Exit: An Alternative Strategy for the Afghan War"/>

{{quote|The bulk of the insurgency fights not for the white banner of the Taliban, but rather against the presence of foreign soldiers and taxes imposed by an unrepresentative government in Kabul.| former U.S. Marine captain and State Department official Matthew Hoh, September 10, 2009<ref name="A letter from Afghanistan that every American must read"/>}}

{{quote|Our policy makers do not understand that the very presence of our forces in the Pashtun areas is the problem.&nbsp;... The more troops we put in, the greater the opposition. We do not mitigate the opposition by increasing troop levels, but rather we increase the opposition and prove to the Pashtuns that the Taliban are correct.&nbsp;... The basic ignorance by our leadership is going to cause the deaths of many fine American troops with no positive outcome.| statement by a group of former U.S. intelligence officials and other experts, September 2009<ref name="The Afghanistan Abyss"/>}}

In the 2009 documentary [https://web.archive.org/web/20100125044316/http://rethinkafghanistan.com/blog/?p=702 "Rethink Afghanistan"], several other former U.S. intelligence officials and experts on Afghanistan also contend that the war in Afghanistan does nothing to protect the safety of American people, but, on the contrary, only threatens the safety and security of Americans, both in the U.S. and abroad:<ref name="Former CIA Operatives Agree: American Occupation of Afghanistan Threatens US Security">{{cite web|url=http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2009/08/19-4|title=Former CIA Operatives Agree: American Occupation of Afghanistan Threatens US Security|work=Common Dreams|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{quote|Both wars have made the Middle East and the world much more dangerous for Americans and for any American presence overseas. It's creating much greater hostility towards the U.S. and creating a whole lot more people that would be happy to kill Americans or join in some kind of terrorist operation.| [[Graham Fuller]], former CIA station chief in Kabul, in "Rethink Afghanistan"<ref name="Former CIA Operatives Agree: American Occupation of Afghanistan Threatens US Security"/>{{better source needed|date=April 2013}}}}

According to the August 2010 report by the Afghanistan Study Group: "The current U.S. military effort is helping fuel the very insurgency we are attempting to defeat."<ref>{{cite magazine|url=http://www.thenation.com/blog/154627/afghanistan-study-group-challenges-us-strategy-flawed-useful-report|title=The Afghanistan Study Group Challenges US Strategy, With Flawed but Useful Report|date=September 10, 2010 |access-date=February 6, 2015 |last1=Dreyfuss |first1=Bob }}</ref>

==Geo-political and corporate interests==

{{See also|The Great Game|CIA activities in Afghanistan|Blowback (intelligence)|Project for a New American Century|Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline}}

{{quote|The current war in Afghanistan is not about democracy, women's rights, education or nation building. Al-Qaida, the other excuse, barely exists. Its handful of members long ago decamped to Pakistan. The war really is about oil pipeline routes and western domination of the energy-rich Caspian Basin.|[[Eric Margolis (journalist)|Eric Margolis]], defence analyst and journalist, August 2009<ref name="Quittin' time in Afghanistan"/>}}

Opposition to the war in Afghanistan often has at its core the view that the U.S. invasion, decade-long presence, and military build-up in Afghanistan are being conducted for [[geo-political]] purposes and U.S. corporate energy interests.<ref name="Quittin' time in Afghanistan"/><ref name="Some Truth About Afghanistan"/><ref name="What good friends left behind">{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/sep/20/afghanistan.weekend7|title=What good friends left behind|work=the Guardian|date=September 20, 2003 |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

=== Pipeline path 'clearing and holding' forces ===

In a June 2008 article in the Toronto Sun entitled "These wars are about oil, not democracy", defense analyst and journalist [[Eric Margolis (journalist)|Eric Margolis]] remarked on the U.S. military bases happening to be adjacent to the planned pipeline route, and wrote: "Work will begin on the [[Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline|TAPI]] once Taliban forces are cleared from the pipeline route by U.S., Canadian and NATO forces. As American analyst Kevin Phillips writes, the U.S. military and its allies have become an 'energy protection force.'"<ref name="These wars are about oil, not democracy">{{cite web|url=http://www.afghanistannewscenter.com/news/2008/june/jun222008.html#14|title=Afghanistan News June 22, 2008|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>{{better source needed|date=April 2013}}

===War in Afghanistan as a demonstration of U.S. military power===

{{See also|Project for a New American Century|Full-spectrum dominance|CIA activities in Afghanistan|Blowback (intelligence)}}

In a November 2, 2001 article entitled "US Bombs Are Boosting the Taliban", anti-Taliban Afghan leader [[Abdul Haq (Afghan leader)|Abdul Haq]] again presented the case he had repeatedly been making against U.S. military action in his country, but seemed resigned that the U.S. was not going to listen:<ref name="US Bombs Are Boosting the Taliban">{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/nov/02/afghanistan.terrorism9|title=Comment: US bombs are boosting the Taliban|work=the Guardian|date=November 2, 2001 |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{quote|The US is trying to show its muscle, score a victory and scare everyone in the world. They don't care about the suffering of the Afghans or how many people we will lose. And we don't like that. Because Afghans are now being made to suffer for these Arab fanatics, but we all know who brought these Arabs to Afghanistan in the 1980s, armed them and gave them a base. It was the Americans and the [[CIA]]. And the Americans who did this all got medals and good careers, while all these years Afghans suffered from these Arabs and their allies. Now, when America is attacked, instead of punishing the Americans who did this, it punishes the Afghans.|[[Abdul Haq (Afghan leader)|Abdul Haq]], anti-Taliban Pashtun leader, October–November 2001, days before he was killed<ref name="US Bombs Are Boosting the Taliban"/>}}

==Thriving opium production since the invasion==

{{main|Opium production in Afghanistan}}

[[Image:Afghanistan opium poppy cultivation 1994-2007b.PNG|thumb|300px|none|Thriving opium poppy cultivation since the U.S. invasion in October 2001 (in hectares).]]

Opium production in Afghanistan has thrived since the U.S. invasion and overthrow of the [[Taliban]] government in 2001. According to [[United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime]] (UNODC) data, there was more opium poppy cultivation in each of the past five growing seasons (2004–2008), than in any one year during the Taliban five-year rule (1996–2001).<ref name="Afghanistan Opium Survey 2007">{{Cite journal|author=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime|title=Afghanistan Opium Survey 2007|url=http://www.unodc.org/pdf/research/AFG07_ExSum_web.pdf|access-date=January 27, 2008|journal=|archive-date=January 28, 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080128143609/http://www.unodc.org/pdf/research/AFG07_ExSum_web.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref name="Afghanistan Opium Survey 2008">{{Cite journal|author=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime|title =Afghanistan Opium Survey 2008|url= http://unama.unmissions.org/LinkClick.aspx?link=UN+4+U%2FAfghanistan_Opium_Survey_2008.pdf&tabid=1788&mid=2055 |format=PDF|access-date=September 20, 2009}}</ref>

UNODC reported in its November 2008 report that the majority 58% of opium poppy-growing farmers in Afghanistan began to cultivate opium after the 2001 U.S. invasion.<ref name="Afghanistan Opium Survey 2008"/>

In July 2000, the Taliban leader, [[Mullah Omar]], argued that opium was against Islam and banned its cultivation. The Taliban edict, with the threat of jail for elders and mullahs who allowed its cultivation, resulted in a 90% reduction in opium cultivation between 2000 and 2001.<ref name="Afghanistan Opium Survey 2007"/><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3071809/ns/us_news-only_on_msnbc_com/t/afghanistans-cash-crop-wilts|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110805020455/http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3071809/ns/us_news-only_on_msnbc_com/t/afghanistans-cash-crop-wilts/|url-status=dead|archive-date=August 5, 2011|title=Afghanistan's cash crop wilts|work=msnbc.com|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

Even compared to 2000 – the year before the Taliban opium ban of 2000–2001 saw effect – the overall opium-related income in the Afghan economy had risen nearly fourfold by 2008, reflecting higher export volumes as well as higher prices.<ref name="Afghanistan Opium Survey 2008"/>

==Financial cost of the war to taxpayers and Western economies==

By 2008, the U.S. military was spending nearly $100 million a day in Afghanistan.<ref name="Men With Guns, in Kabul and Washington">[http://www.e-ariana.com/ariana/eariana.nsf/allDocs/D3967833D255B5C38725762C0018A0A1 Men With Guns, in Kabul and Washington]</ref><ref name="Caught in a swirl of deceit">[http://www.smh.com.au/text/articles/2009/09/04/1252001247692.html Caught in a swirl of deceit]</ref>

By one estimate in September 2009, the United States, which had approximately two-thirds of the foreign troops in Afghanistan, had already spent some $250 billion in Afghanistan since 2001.<ref name="America has been here before">[http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/eric_margolis/2009/09/20/11005751-sun.html America has been here before]</ref>

By October or November 2009, estimates by the [[Congressional Research Service]] placed the cost that could be accounted for at $300 billion spent or committed.<ref name="Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 163 (Wednesday, November 4, 2009)">{{cite web|url=http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2009-11-04/html/CREC-2009-11-04-pt1-PgH12340-2.htm|title=Congressional Record, Volume 155 Issue 163 (Wednesday, November 4, 2009)|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{quote|The Congressional Research Service estimates that we have now spent or committed $300 billion, and that is only the money for which we can account. Some will say it is twice that, for this war, like the war in Iraq, was funded off-budget with no transparency. ... $300 billion. That is about $101 million per day for 2,950 days. Or, to put out another average, that is $3,947 per family of four that every American family has paid to date. ... To continue this war at its current level and to escalate it beyond its current scope is a trillion dollar question. Are those who would so cavalierly make this commitment willing to demand another $3,947.36 from every American family of four to pay for it? ... Thousands have protested federal spending to rebuild America's schools, roads, bridges and critical infrastructure, but are they willing to do the same when their taxes are being spent to rebuild Kabul?| U.S. Congress Rep. [[Eric Massa]], November 4, 2009<ref name="Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 163 (Wednesday, November 4, 2009)"/>}}

In September 2009, the [[Christian Science Monitor]] [http://features.csmonitor.com/economyrebuild/2009/09/15/economic-scene-afghanistan-will-cost-us-more-than-iraq/ reported] that in the upcoming budget year, the U.S. war in Afghanistan would, for the first time, cost American taxpayers more than the U.S. war in Iraq. By the end of September 2010, the total military budget costs for both wars will have exceeded $1 [[Orders of magnitude (numbers)|trillion]].<ref name="ECONOMIC SCENE: Afghanistan will cost US more than Iraq">{{cite journal|url=http://features.csmonitor.com/economyrebuild/2009/09/15/economic-scene-afghanistan-will-cost-us-more-than-iraq/|title=ECONOMIC SCENE: Afghanistan will cost US more than Iraq|author=The Christian Science Monitor|journal=The Christian Science Monitor|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

By October 2009, news reports indicated U.S. costs of fighting the war in Afghanistan at $165 million every 24 hours.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/Afghanistan/article6869503.ece|title=Login|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

Officially, the United States' military costs for the war in Afghanistan were budgeted at $65 billion for fiscal 2010, a figure amounting to $178 million a day.<ref name="ECONOMIC SCENE: Afghanistan will cost US more than Iraq"/>

However the true cost will probably be closer to $85 billion, or more, according to Gordon Adams, a defense expert at [[American University]]'s [[School of International Service]] in Washington. That figure would amount to about $233 million a day.

Factoring in veteran health and other benefits, replenishment of military hardware, a higher price for oil, and the [[interest]] on debt incurred by the wars, [[Linda Bilmes]], a [[Harvard University]] economist, and [[Joseph Stiglitz]], a [[Columbia University]] [[Nobel Prize]] economist, estimated a "moderate-realistic" bill for the two wars of $5 trillion to U.S. taxpayers.<ref name="ECONOMIC SCENE: Afghanistan will cost US more than Iraq"/>

In September 2009, foreign policy veteran [[William R. Polk]] suggested that the real cost of the war in Afghanistan to the U.S. economy would end up being over $3 trillion.<ref name="An Open Letter to President Obama">{{cite web|url=http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091019/polk|title=An Open Letter to President Obama|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

In September 2009, the U.S. [[Congressional Budget Office]] estimated that a speedier withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan and Iraq, with a sharp reduction in troops over three years, could save taxpayers $1.1 trillion from the budget in the next decade.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/09/military_troopwithdrawals_cost_090309w/|title=Faster troop withdrawal may save $1 trillion|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{quote|We've been there eight years already, and how many more years are we supposed to be there? How many more Americans are supposed to die? How many more tens and tens of billions of dollars are we supposed to be spending at a time when we have a record-breaking deficit?

| U.S. Senator [[Bernie Sanders]] in September 2009<ref>[http://www.naplesnews.com/blogs/social-critic/2009/oct/21/peaceful/ Some reasons why the war in Afghanistan is insanity]</ref><ref name="Sanders Calls for National Dialogue on Afghanistan Exit Strategy">{{cite web|url=http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/472505/sanders_worries_that_afghanistan_will_be_another_vietnam|title=John Nichols|access-date=6 February 2015}}</ref>}}

In December 2009, U.S. President Barack Obama announced a surge of yet another thirty thousand U.S. troops into Afghanistan, increasing the buildup of the U.S. military in Afghanistan by another 40-45% and adding further red ink to the United States' $1.4 trillion [[deficit spending]] and [[United States public debt|national debt]] of over $12 trillion. The administration estimated the cost for this surge at $30 billion (presumably for an initial 18-month period). However, the chairman of the appropriations subcommittee with authority over the Pentagon's budget, U.S. Congress Rep. [[John Murtha]], estimated that the surge would cost at least $40 billion – $10 billion more than the administration's estimate. The congressman also called for a surtax to finance the war, saying the U.S. risks the sort of [[inflation]] seen in the [[Vietnam War]] era.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aezzfE6Fov.A&pos=8|title=Afghanistan Surge to Cost $40 Billion, Democrat Says (Update2)|website=[[Bloomberg News]] |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-12-02-war-costs_N.htm|title=Cost of Afghan war explodes with new strategy - USATODAY.com|website=[[USA Today]] |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

By February 2010, with thousands more U.S. troops still to arrive, the monthly cost of the war in Afghanistan to U.S. taxpayers had exceeded that of the U.S. war in Iraq – consuming $6.7 billion per month, compared with $5.5 billion in Iraq, and amounting to about $223 million per day.<ref name="A flawed strategy and a failed war in Afghanistan">{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/25/AR2010052502255_pf.html|title=Katrina vanden Heuvel - A flawed strategy and a failed war in Afghanistan|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="Afghan war costs now outpace Iraq's">{{cite web|url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/world/afghanistan/2010-05-12-afghan_N.htm?csp=34|title=Afghan war costs now outpace Iraq's - USATODAY.com|website=[[USA Today]] |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{quote|Military operations in Afghanistan have cost American taxpayers more than $200,000,000,000 in deficit spending since 2001.

| House and Senate bills [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.5015: H.R.05015] and [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:S.3197: S.3197], April 14, 2010<ref name="Demand an Afghanistan Exit Strategy"/><ref>{{cite web|url=http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:S.3197:|title=Bill Text - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)|access-date=25 May 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.5015:|title=Bill Text - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)|access-date=May 25, 2016}}</ref>}}

By May 2010, the estimate for fiscal year 2010 that was being reported had risen to $105 billion, amounting to $288 million per day. Meanwhile, the cost of the war to U.S. taxpayers in fiscal year 2011 was being projected at $117 billion, a figure amounting to around $320 million per day. Todd Harrison of the [[Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments]] stated: "The cost just cascades. That's always been an issue in Afghanistan."<ref name="Afghan war costs now outpace Iraq's"/>

By December 2010, estimates had the cost of the war running at as high as $13 billion a month, or over $433 million per day, and a USA Today / Gallup poll reported that over two-thirds of Americans, the 68% majority, worry that the costs of the war in Afghanistan make it more difficult to address the problems facing them at home.<ref name="Some Truth About Afghanistan"/><ref name="Obama's isolation grows on the Afghanistan war">{{cite web|url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-12-01-1Awar01_CV_N.htm?csp=34news|title=Obama's isolation grows on the Afghanistan war - USATODAY.com|website=[[USA Today]] |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

In February 2011, U.S. Defense Secretary [[Robert M. Gates]] bluntly warned that it would be unwise to ever again engage in such a『costly – and controversial – large-scale American military intervention』as in Afghanistan or Iraq.<ref name="Warning Against Wars Like Iraq and Afghanistan">{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/26/world/26gates.html?_r=1&src=me&ref=general|title=Gates Warns Against More Wars Like Iraq and Afghanistan|website=[[The New York Times]] |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.afghanistanstudygroup.org/2011/03/01/%E2%80%9Cnever-get-involved-in-a-land-war-in-asia%E2%80%9D-gates%E2%80%99-west-point-speech-and-a-tipping-point-in-afghanistan/|title="Never Get Involved in a Land War in Asia": Gates' West Point Speech and a Tipping Point in Afghanistan|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{quote|In my opinion, any future defense secretary who advises the president to again send a big American land army into Asia or into the Middle East or Africa should 'have his head examined,' as General MacArthur so delicately put it.| U.S. Defense Secretary [[Robert M. Gates]], February 25, 2011<ref name="Warning Against Wars Like Iraq and Afghanistan"/>}}

In February 2011, Indiana Senator [[Richard Lugar]], the top Republican on the [[United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations|Foreign Relations Committee]], ticked through the rising financial costs of the U.S. war in Afghanistan:<ref name="Poll: With bin Laden dead, is it time to end war?">{{cite web|url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2011-05-10-Afghanistan-mission-bin-Laden-troops-poll_n.htm|title=Poll: With bin Laden dead, is it time to end war?|work=USATODAY.COM|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

::* 100,000 U.S. military troops in Afghanistan,

::* another 31,000 U.S. military troops deployed in the surrounding region to support the operations in Afghanistan,

::* more than $100 billion in Obama's 2012 budget request for Afghanistan,

::* an additional $13 billion to train Afghan forces,

::* another $5 billion in civilian assistance.

He stated: "With al-Qaeda largely displaced from the country but [[#Rejection of the terrorism argument|franchised in other locations]], Afghanistan does not carry a strategic value that justifies 100,000 U.S. troops and a $100 billion per year cost, especially given current fiscal restraints."<ref name="Poll: With bin Laden dead, is it time to end war?"/>

The Senate Foreign Relations Chairman, Senator [[John Kerry]], warned: "Make no mistake, it is unsustainable to continue spending $10 billion a month on a massive military operation with no end in sight."<ref name="Poll: With bin Laden dead, is it time to end war?"/>

In March 2011, U.S. Congress Representative [[Bruce Braley]], a member of the House Committee on Veterans Affairs, introduced the [http://braley.house.gov/images/stories/Documents/03092011/True.Cost.of.War.Act.2011.pdf True Cost of War Act] to require a full accounting on the long-term human and financials costs to the American people of the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq through 2020, including "interest on money borrowed, including interest for money already borrowed and anticipated interest payments on future borrowing."<ref name="Commanders Expect A 'Significant' U.S. Presence In Afghanistan For 8 To 10 More Years: Dem Rep">{{cite web|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/10/bruce-braley-afghanistan_n_833713.html|title=Commanders Expect A 'Significant' U.S. Presence In Afghanistan For 8 To 10 More Years: Dem Rep|work=The Huffington Post|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

Rep. Braley stated: "The American people – especially at a time when Republicans have been pushing all these budget cuts – are entitled to know what the true costs are."<ref name="Commanders Expect A 'Significant' U.S. Presence In Afghanistan For 8 To 10 More Years: Dem Rep"/>

{{quote|According to the [[Congressional Research Service]], through fiscal year 2010, Congress has appropriated $1,087,000,000,000 for the Department of Defense, for the State Department, and for medical costs paid by the Department of Veterans Affairs. This amount includes $751,000,000,000 related to operations in Iraq and $336,000,000,000 related to operations in Afghanistan.

| Congressional [http://braley.house.gov/images/stories/Documents/03092011/True.Cost.of.War.Act.2011.pdf True Cost of War Act], March 8, 2011<ref name="Commanders Expect A 'Significant' U.S. Presence In Afghanistan For 8 To 10 More Years: Dem Rep"/>}}

According to estimates near the beginning of 2011, the U.S. war in Afghanistan would cost U.S. taxpayers an $116 billion for that year – nearly twice the amounts being deeply slashed from domestic programs, including key U.S. infrastructure needs such as water, air traffic, and rail projects – while the minimum projected cost of the U.S. war for the next two years, $200 billion, exceeds the domestic budget [[Government budget deficit|deficit]] of all 50 states put together.<ref name="Bid to end Afghan war funding hits GOP roadblock">{{cite web|url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=%2Fc%2Fa%2F2011%2F02%2F21%2FMN3M1HQ55M.DTL|title=Bid to end Afghan war funding hits GOP roadblock|work=SFGate|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="Afghanistan Withdrawal Resolution Passes Democratic National Committee Without Dissent"/>

By May 2011, the Washington Post reported that in the face of increasing [[deficit spending]] and more cuts to domestic programs in the U.S. the immense cost of the war in Afghanistan would likely be the primary factor in the discussions to reduce troops: Spending by the U.S. military alone on its operations in Afghanistan was heading to $113 billion for the fiscal year, with the military seeking another $107 billion for the next fiscal year. According to a senior administration official: "Where we're at right now is simply not sustainable."<ref name="Cost of war in Afghanistan will be major factor in troop-reduction talks">{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cost-of-war-in-afghanistan-will-be-major-factor-in-troop-reduction-talks/2011/05/27/AGR8z2EH_print.html|title=Cost of war in Afghanistan will be major factor in troop-reduction talks - The Washington Post|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

With the costs to maintain the Afghan army and police forces, estimated at $6 billion to $8 billion a year, far exceeding the means of the Afghan government whose annual budget totals only about $1.5 billion, he stated: "We're building an army that they'll never be able to pay for, which means we're going to have to pay for it for years and years to come."<ref name="Cost of war in Afghanistan will be major factor in troop-reduction talks"/>

Military and civilian officials agree that the cost of the Afghan war is staggering, and another senior administration official involved with Afghanistan policy stated that the cost of the war was now "the new 800-pound gorilla" and policy discussion was shifting from "Is the strategy working?" to "Can we afford this?"<ref name="Cost of war in Afghanistan will be major factor in troop-reduction talks"/>

In the United Kingdom, a comprehensive analysis by [[The Independent]] in July 2009, revealed that the cost of the war to British taxpayers had already exceeded £12 billion ($US 20 billion) – enough to pay for "23 new hospitals, 60,000 new teachers or 77,000 new nurses". A Ministry of Defence source indicated that the department feared the Afghan campaign was adding at least £250 million a year ($US 405 million) to their spending on veteran welfare services. In addition to these military costs, British taxpayer money is also being spent on Afghanistan by the Department of International Development (DfID), which will have spent close to £1 billion ($US 1.6 billion) between 2001 and 2012, and the Foreign Office (FCO) that had already spent £230 million ($US 375 million) since 2006 alone.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/revealed-16312bn-hidden-costs-of-afghan-war-1761469.html|title=Revealed: £12bn hidden costs of Afghan war - Home News - UK - The Independent|work=The Independent|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

===Damage to the economy===

In September 2011, a decade into the U.S.-led war, [[Linda Bilmes]], a [[Harvard University]] economist, and [[Joseph Stiglitz]], a [[Columbia University]] [[Nobel Prize]] economist, wrote that the enormous costs of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq had profoundly damaged the U.S. economy:<ref name="America's costly war machine">{{cite web|url=http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe--bilmes-war-cost-20110918,0,1598244.story|title=America's too-costly war on terror|work=Los Angeles Times|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{quote|To date, the United States has spent more than $2.5 trillion on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Pentagon spending spree that accompanied it and a battery of new homeland security measures instituted after Sept. 11. ... How have we paid for this? Entirely through borrowing. ... Spending on the wars and on added security at home has accounted for more than one-quarter of the total increase in U.S. government [[debt]] since 2001.| [[Linda Bilmes]] and [[Joseph Stiglitz]], September 2011<ref name="America's costly war machine"/>}}

They [http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe--bilmes-war-cost-20110918,0,1598244.story wrote] that the costs of the wars would continue to burden U.S. taxpayers and the U.S. economy for decades after whenever the U.S. military leaves those countries. The future debts from the war – including [[interest]] payments on all the borrowed money, replacing worn and destroyed military equipment, and decades of paying for the medical and disability benefits of hundreds of thousands of veterans – "are not listed anywhere in the federal government's budget" and would "continue to compromise America's investments in its future for decades."<ref name="America's costly war machine"/>

On September 19, 2011, U.S. President [[Barack Obama]]'s proposed plan to reduce U.S. [[wikt:deficit|deficit]] spending stated that $1.1 trillion would be saved by withdrawing all U.S. combat troops from Afghanistan over the next three years (by 2014) and ending the war in Iraq. The $1.1 trillion in [[deficit spending]] on wars amounted to almost one-third of the proposed $3.6 trillion deficit-reduction package.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://montrealgazette.com/news/Obama+pushes+higher+taxes+wealthy/5424793/story.html|title=Republicans cry class warfare as Obama pushes higher taxes for wealthy|author=Sheldon Alberts|work=www.montrealgazette.com|access-date=May 25, 2016}}</ref>

==Length of the war==

{{See also|List of the lengths of United States participation in wars}}

{{quote|We are mortgaging our Nation's economy on a war, which, even with increased commitment, will remain a draw for years to come. Success and victory, whatever they may be, will be realized not in years, after billions more spent, but in decades and generations.

| former U.S. Marine captain and State Department official Matthew Hoh, September 10, 2009<ref name="A letter from Afghanistan that every American must read"/>}}

The war in Afghanistan, launched October 7, 2001 as U.S. "[[Operation Enduring Freedom]]", has now stretched over a decade, entering an eleventh year on October 7, 2011 and marking for the U.S. the longest period of sustained warfare in its history – greater than the time the United States was involved in [[World War I]], [[World War II]] and the [[Korean War]] combined.<ref name="Bid to end Afghan war funding hits GOP roadblock"/><ref name="War and Sacrifice in the Post-9/11 Era">{{cite web|url=http://pewresearch.org/pubs/2111/veterans-post-911-wars-iraq-afghanistan-civilian-military-veterans|title=War and Sacrifice in the Post-9/11 Era|date=October 5, 2011|work=Pew Research Center's Social & Demographic Trends Project|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="Let Us Not Become the Evil We Deplore">{{cite web|url=http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/09/16|title=Let Us Not Become the Evil We Deplore|work=Common Dreams|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

The war in Afghanistan surpassed the [[List of the lengths of United States participation in wars|length of official United States participation]] in the [[Vietnam War]], 8 years and 5 months, in the spring of 2010 to become the longest-running U.S. war ever.<ref name="Some Truth About Afghanistan"/><ref name="War and Sacrifice in the Post-9/11 Era"/><ref name="Associated Press tally of lengths of U.S. participation in major wars">{{cite web|url=http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20061125-0912-bushslongwar.html|title=SignOnSanDiego.com > News > Nation -- U.S. involved in Iraq war longer than it was in World War II|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="mtexpress.com">{{cite web|url=http://www.mtexpress.com/index2.php?ID=2005131540|title=Idaho Mountain Express: From critic of one 'shameful' war to booster of another - May 26, 2010|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="The news is bad">{{cite web|url=http://www.helsinkitimes.fi/htimes/international-news/11490-the-news-is-bad.html|title=Does the Finnish customer know best?|author=HT|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/konrad-yakabuski/new-us-commander-in-afghanistan-is-a-consummate-politician/article1615545/|title=New U.S. commander in Afghanistan is a consummate politician|work=The Globe and Mail|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>[http://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/print/content/view/print/310923 Quagmire? Nine years on, Americans grow weary of war in Afghanistan]</ref>

According to a study by the [[RAND]] Corporation, an American think tank working for the U.S. military, [[counter-insurgency]] campaigns won by governments have averaged 14 years.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/08/27/obamas-afghan-war-a-race-against-time/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090830063458/http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/08/27/obamas-afghan-war-a-race-against-time/|url-status=dead|archive-date=August 30, 2009|title=Obama's Afghan war – a race against time|work=Reuters|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

In a July 2009 [http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,druck-633842,00.html interview], when asked when German troops would withdraw from Afghanistan, former German Defence Minister [[Peter Struck (politician)|Peter Struck]] replied: "I'm afraid it could take another 10 years."<ref name="Two Views on Afghanistan Mission – 'The War Is a Breeding Program for Terrorists'">{{cite web|url=http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,druck-633842,00.html|title=Druckversion - Two Views on Afghanistan Mission: 'The War Is a Breeding Program for Terrorists' - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News - International|publisher=SPIEGEL ONLINE|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

In March 2011, U.S. Congressman [[Bruce Braley]] reported that American military commanders in Afghanistan very clearly expect – under the best-case scenario – a "significant U.S. presence" to continue in that country for approximately another decade. His report of the expectations of a continued U.S. military presence through 2020 came after a fact-finding trip to Afghanistan where he met with U.S. General [[David Petraeus]], U.S. Ambassador and former general [[Karl Eikenberry]], as well as other military officials.<ref name="Commanders Expect A 'Significant' U.S. Presence In Afghanistan For 8 To 10 More Years: Dem Rep"/>

In December 2009, a week after U.S. President Barack Obama announced a surge of another thirty thousand U.S. military troops into Afghanistan, Afghan President Hamid Karzai, speaking at a news conference with U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, stated that the Afghan government being supported would not be able to secure the country on its own "for another 15 to 20 years", suggesting a U.S.-led military presence until at least 2024, if not 2030.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/13/opinion/13dowd.html|title=A Game That's Not So Great|date=December 13, 2009|work=The New York Times|access-date=May 25, 2016}}</ref><ref>[http://www.argusleader.com/article/20100102/VOICES07/1020303/1052/OPINION01 Afghanistan pro-con: It will become a quagmire]</ref><ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/world/asia/09gates.html?scp=1&sq=afghanistan's%20president%20says%20army%20will%20need&st=cse Afghan Says Army Will Need Help Until 2024]</ref>

At the end of December 2009, following a visit to Afghanistan as part of an eight-member congressional delegation, U.S. Congressman [[Brian Higgins]] warned that U.S. military assessments describe a "generational commitment" requiring at least two decades and that might not work, and he stated that President Obama needed to be more forthright with the American people about the length of time involved and the prospects.<ref name="20-year commitment needed in Afghanistan, Higgins says">[http://www.buffalonews.com/180/story/909073.html 20-year commitment needed in Afghanistan, Higgins says]</ref>

{{quote|The military assessments say this is a generational commitment. I will tell you this whole 18 months of drawing down troops is not going to happen. The military assessments are very clear: In order to stabilize Afghanistan, you essentially have to rebuild it. You can't accomplish that in 18 months, five years, or in a decade, and you'll be lucky to accomplish that in 20 years. Gen. McChrystal told me he will know in 18 months if this will work.| U.S. Congressman [[Brian Higgins]], December 2009<ref name="20-year commitment needed in Afghanistan, Higgins says"/>}}

A January 2009 U.S. Defense Department report assessing progress in Afghanistan concluded that building a fully competent and independent Afghan government would be a lengthy process that would last, "at a minimum, decades."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/12/world/asia/12civil.html|title=Civilian Goals Largely Unmet in Afghanistan|date=October 12, 2009|work=The New York Times|access-date=May 25, 2016}}</ref>

The head of the British Army and former [[International Security Assistance Force|ISAF]] commander, General Sir [[David Richards (British Army officer)|David Richards]], stated on August 8, 2009 that he believed Britain could still be militarily involved in Afghanistan in "30 to 40 years" time, raising the possibility of a military presence in Afghanistan until the year 2050.<ref name="Army Chief: We'll be in Afghanistan until 2050">{{cite web|url=http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/119399/Army-chief-We-ll-be-in-Afghanistan-until-2050|title=Army chief: We'll be in Afghanistan until 2050|work=Express.co.uk|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

Asked how long U.S. combat forces would be needed in Afghanistan, U.S. Defense Secretary [[Robert Gates]] replied it was "unpredictable" and "perhaps a few years". However, over the longer term, Gates said that even if security were achieved, progress in building Afghanistan's economy and government institutions would remain "a decades-long enterprise", and that the United States was "committed to that side of the equation for an indefinite period of time."<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/13/AR2009081303763_pf.html|title=Gates: No Troop Request In Afghanistan Review|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

American defense analyst John Pike of GlobalSecurity.org envisions a near-endless scenario in Afghanistan: "It's not going to end. And it may get worse before it gets better ... it's going to last for decades."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2006/060919-canada-afghanistan.htm|title=Risk of death soars for Canada's troops|author=John Pike|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{quote|More and more people feel that it is a never ending story, that this war has been dragging on now for longer than the second world war, that we see too little results and we really don't know why we are there.| Patrick Keller, foreign and security policy analyst, September 2009<ref name="More troops and new strategy for Afghanistan will be hard to come by">{{cite web|url=http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,4718369,00.html?maca=en-en_nr-1893-xml-atom|title=More troops and new strategy for Afghanistan will be hard to come by|work=DW.DE|access-date=6 February 2015}}</ref>}}

===Comparison to the length of the Soviet–Afghan War===

{{See also|Soviet–Afghan War}}

After 7 years and 7 months of war in Afghanistan, [[Mikhail Gorbachev]] announced on July 20, 1987 the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan, saying that the Soviet Union wanted to henceforth see an independent, [[sovereignty|sovereign]] Afghanistan with a non-aligned government. The complete withdrawal of Soviet troops took place over roughly one year and a half, ending on February 15, 1989, with the Soviet–Afghan War having lasted approximately 9 years and 2 months in its entirety.<ref>[http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB272/Doc%2014%20Official%20chronology%20of%20withdrawal.pdf Official chronology of the withdrawal from Afghanistan]</ref><ref name="West ignores lessons of Soviet humiliation in Afghanistan">{{cite web|url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6719240.ece|title=Login|work=Times|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

In December 2010, the U.S. war in Afghanistan, which officially began October 7, 2001, exceeded the length of the entire Soviet campaign in Afghanistan.<ref name="Matthew Hoh September 10, 2009 letter of resignation" /><ref name="Obama's isolation grows on the Afghanistan war" /><ref name="West ignores lessons of Soviet humiliation in Afghanistan" />

{{quote|There is barely an important piece of land in Afghanistan that has not been occupied by one of our soldiers at some time or another. Nevertheless, much of the territory stays in the hands of the terrorists. We control the provincial centres, but we cannot maintain political control over the territory that we seize.| Marshal Sergei Akhromeyev, commander of Soviet armed forces, November 13, 1986<ref name="West ignores lessons of Soviet humiliation in Afghanistan" />}}

In November 1986, with 109,000 troops in Afghanistan and the war soon heading into an 8th year, the military counter-insurgency was not working. Marshal [[Sergei Akhromeyev]], commander of Soviet armed forces, was summoned to report on the situation to the USSR's [[politburo]] in the [[Kremlin]]. His strong assessment was that the army needed more resources, and he warned that without more men and equipment "this war will continue for a very long time". By the peak of the Soviet deployment in 1987, Moscow had 140,000 troops in Afghanistan.<ref name="West ignores lessons of Soviet humiliation in Afghanistan" /><ref name="Pressure grows in Afghanistan for Hamid Karzai to strike a deal">{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/sep/13/hamid-karzai-power-sharing-afghanistan|title=Afghan election: Pressure grows for Hamid Karzai to strike a deal|author=Declan Walsh|work=The Guardian|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

In September 2009, with 108,000 to 110,000 foreign troops in Afghanistan under U.S. command and the war soon heading into a 9th year, the military counter-insurgency was not working. A 66-page report by U.S. general [[Stanley McChrystal]] to the [[White House]] administration on the situation in Afghanistan, [[News leak|leaked]] in advance of an anticipated troop request, gave his strong assessment that more troops and resources were needed. McChrystal warned: "Resources will not win this war, but under-resourcing could lose it. Failure to provide adequate resources also risks a longer conflict, greater casualties, higher overall costs and ultimately, a critical loss of political support. Any of these risks, in turn, are likely to result in mission failure." After officially receiving McChrystal's request for more troops, U.S. president Barack Obama would announce that some 30,000 more U.S. troops would be sent to Afghanistan over the course of the following year.<ref name="Time to Get Out of Afghanistan"/><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newstatesman.com/2009/09/afghanistan-mcchrystal-general|title=Top US general calls for new strategy in Afghanistan|work=New Statesman|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/6215276/Afghan-mission-risks-failure-without-more-troops-says-US-general.html|title=Afghan mission risks 'failure' without more troops, says US general|author=Alex Spillius |date=September 21, 2009|work=Telegraph|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/joeBiden/idUSTRE58L2PS20090922|title=A D.C. whodunit: Who leaked and why?|work=Reuters|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,551120,00.html|title=Sources: McChrystal Wants Up to 40,000 More Troops in Afghanistan|publisher=Fox News|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>[https://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iqyaFh_efr-brDq0rMLF1hkop0tgD9AT5RDO0 Commander to send troop request for Afghanistan]{{dead link|date=June 2024|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/25/aides-mullen-likely-sign-afghanistan-troop-request/|title=Aides: Mullen Likely to Sign off on Afghanistan Troop Request |publisher=Fox news|access-date=May 25, 2016}}</ref><ref>[http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Troop+request+on+table+as+Obama+weighs+Afghan+mission-a01612018826 Troop request on table as Obama weighs Afghan mission ]></ref><ref>[https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=9235427 Analysis: Obama Borrows Soviet's Afghan Endgame]></ref><ref name="The Runaway General">{{cite magazine|url=https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100624014247/http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236/|url-status=dead|archive-date=June 24, 2010|title=General Stanley McChrystal: The Runaway General by Michael Hastings |magazine=Rolling Stone|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="U.S. puppet cuts his strings">[http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/eric_margolis/2010/04/09/13530691.html U.S. puppet cuts his strings]</ref>

{{quote|It is sometimes frightening to see how similar NATO military operations are to Soviet ones in the 1980s.

McChrystal, the U.S. general, at the same time called for a new strategy of pulling troops from sparsely populated rural areas to concentrate on defending higher population urban areas.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/28/world/asia/28military.html|title=White House Believes Karzai Will Be Re-elected|date=September 28, 2009|work=The New York Times|access-date=May 25, 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/05/world/asia/05afghan.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all|title=Deadly Attack on Remote Posts Highlights Afghan Risks |work=New York Times|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref> Tom Coghlan of [[The Times]] observed: "Students of Afghan history may note that this strategic conclusion was one previously reached by the Soviets, who also switched to a strategy of ceding remote areas and only defending population centres and the country's main arteries in 1986."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/Afghanistan/article6861050.ece|title=Login|work=Times|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

The decade-long war in Afghanistan has also been increasingly compared to the [[Vietnam War]], and increasingly characterized as a quagmire.<ref name="The Afghan War Moves South" /><ref name="Afghan War Draws Comparisons to Vietnam">[http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-10-08-voa29.cfm Afghan War Draws Comparisons to Vietnam]</ref><ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20100604053031/http://blogs.reuters.com/afghanistan/2010/05/25/can-america-win-in-afghanistan/ Can America win in Afghanistan?]</ref>

In the spring of 2010, the war in Afghanistan surpassed the [[List of the lengths of United States participation in wars|length of official United States participation]] in the [[Vietnam War]], 8 years and 5 months, as the longest-running U.S. war ever.<ref name="Bid to end Afghan war funding hits GOP roadblock" /><ref name="Associated Press tally of lengths of U.S. participation in major wars" /><ref name="mtexpress.com" /><ref name="The news is bad" />

{{quote|What I found being in Afghanistan was all too familiar of problems not only in Iraq, but in Vietnam years ago. We are fighting a war a half a century later that we lost for similar reasons a half a century earlier.| [[Anthony Cordesman]], Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2009<ref name="Afghan War Draws Comparisons to Vietnam" />}}

{{quote|The Vietnam analogy remains haunting. On Mr. Obama's nightstand is Gordon Goldstein's acclaimed biography of McGeorge Bundy, "Lessons in Disaster", which describes the flawed decision-making of President Lyndon B. Johnson in the Vietnam quagmire.| Albert R. Hunt, ''New York Times'', October 4, 2009<ref name="A Voice Worth Heeding on Afghanistan" />}}

In March 2009, a bipartisan group of 14 members of the [[United States House of Representatives]] – [[Walter B. Jones|Walter Jones]], [[Ron Paul]], [[Dennis Kucinich]], [[Neil Abercrombie]], [[Roscoe Bartlett]], [[Steve Kagen]], [[Ed Whitfield]], [[Lynn Woolsey]], [[Bob Filner]], [[Jim McGovern (American politician)|Jim McGovern]], [[Howard Coble]], [[John Conyers]], [[Marcy Kaptur]], [[John Duncan (US Administration)|John Duncan]], and [[Michael Michaud]] – signed a letter to President Obama urging him to reconsider his decision to send 17,000 more U.S. troops, and to "resist pressure to escalate further".<ref name="Can Congress Save Obama from Afghan Quagmire?">{{cite web|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/can-congress-save-obama-f_b_173080.html|title=Can Congress Save Obama from Afghan Quagmire?|work=The Huffington Post|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fcnl.org/pdfs/afghan/escalation_congress.pdf|title=FCNL: We're Sorry|work=FCNL|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

In September 2009, Senator [[John F. Kerry]], chairman of the [[Senate Foreign Relations Committee]] and a veteran and protester of the [[Vietnam War]], warned of repeating the mistakes of Vietnam and said that the United States needed to have an [[exit strategy]].<ref name="Plan to Boost Afghan Forces Splits Obama Advisers">{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/27/world/asia/27military.html?_r=1&em=&pagewanted=print|title=Advisers to Obama Are Split on Afghan Troop Request - NYTimes.com|access-date=February 6, 2015|newspaper=The New York Times|date=September 26, 2009|last1=Baker|first1=Peter|last2=Bumiller|first2=Elisabeth}}</ref><ref>[https://archive.today/20130124171735/http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5i-ND1wGIRzFKVd2SrBCzb_QnMGlg Top US senator pleads for patience on Afghanistan]</ref><ref>[http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2009/09/kerry_points_to.html Kerry points to Vietnam lessons on Afghanistan]</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704471504574438660617984826?mod=googlenews_wsj|title=John Kerry: Testing Afghanistan Assumptions - WSJ|author=John Kerry|date=September 27, 2009|work=WSJ|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{quote|History tells us that there will not be a military-first solution to the situation in Afghanistan. Open-ended military intervention in Afghanistan is not in our national security interest and will only continue to give resonance to insurgent recruiters painting pictures of foreign occupation to a new generation.| Representative [[Barbara Lee]], October 4, 2009<ref name="Congresswoman Lee Introduces Legislation Prohibiting Funding for Military Escalation in Afghanistan"/>}}

{{quote|I am compelled to ask: does it really, really take 100,000 U.S. troops to find Osama bin Laden? If al Qaida has moved to Pakistan, what will these troops in Afghanistan add to the effort to defeat al Qaida?| Senator [[Robert Byrd]], October 15, 2009 speech to the U.S. Senate<ref name="US Lawmakers Question Afghanistan Strategy"/>}}

On November 4, 2009, U.S. Congress Rep. [[Eric Massa]] spoke before the [[U.S. House of Representatives]] to say [http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2009-11-04/html/CREC-2009-11-04-pt1-PgH12340-2.htm enough is enough in Afghanistan]. He stated: "Today is the 2,950th day of this war. It has cost us $300 billion, $3,947 per American family. Enough is enough. It is time to bring our troops home. ... the deployment of additional troops in Afghanistan and the continuation of this conflict is both not in the interest of our Nation, and, in fact, is on par with a potential error the size of our initial invasion in Iraq."<ref name="Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 163 (Wednesday, November 4, 2009)"/>

In April 2010, Democratic Congressman [[Jim McGovern (American politician)|Jim McGovern]], Republican Congressman [[Walter B. Jones, Jr.|Walter Jones]], and Democratic Senator [[Russ Feingold]] introduced [https://archive.today/20120714212212/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.5015: legislation] demanding an exit strategy and a timetable for withdrawal of the American military forces and military contractors in Afghanistan. While noting Obama's promise to begin bringing some troops back in July 2010, Rep. McGovern said: "It's not only important to know when the first soldier is to be redeployed or brought home, it's important to know when the last soldier is as well."<ref name="A flawed strategy and a failed war in Afghanistan"/><ref name="Demand an Afghanistan Exit Strategy">{{cite web|url=http://www.thenation.com/blog/demand-afghanistan-exit-strategy|title=Demand an Afghanistan Exit Strategy|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{quote|The hundreds of billions of dollars we spend over there on war ... All that – mostly borrowed money – means that we're not investing at home. It means our roads and our bridges aren't being fixed. It means our schools aren't being fixed. It means we're not investing in healthcare, and a whole range of other things that we need to do to get our economy back on track.| Rep. [[Jim McGovern (American politician)|Jim McGovern]], May 2010<ref name="Demand an Afghanistan Exit Strategy"/>}}

In February 2011, a bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers again introduced legislation to end combat operations in Afghanistan and reduce spending of U.S. taxpayer dollars on the war. Led by Republican Congressmen [[Ron Paul]] of Texas, [[Walter B. Jones, Jr.|Walter Jones]] of North Carolina, and Democratic Congresswoman [[Barbara Lee]] of California, the amendment had 45 other co-sponsors. Republican congressmen opposed to the continued large-scale combat operations in Afghanistan convened a meeting for GOP members which had as principle speakers [[Americans for Tax Reform]] President [[Grover Norquist]], Maj. Gen. [[John Batiste]] (ret.) and Lt. Col. Eric Egland (Reserve), a career intelligence officer with experience in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq. According to numerous polls, the majority of Americans now want a faster withdrawal from Afghanistan.<ref name="Bid to end Afghan war funding hits GOP roadblock"/><ref name="Bipartisan Group Of Lawmakers Introduce Afghanistan Withdrawal Legislation">{{cite web|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/17/afghanistan-withdrawal-legislation_n_824581.html|title=Bipartisan Group Of Lawmakers Introduce Afghanistan Withdrawal Legislation|work=The Huffington Post|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{quote|The mounting costs of the war in Afghanistan, now totaling over $100 billion a year, have constrained efforts to invest in job creation and in strengthening our country and our economy.| [[Democratic National Committee]] resolution, February 2011<ref name="The DNC Wants Out of Afghanistan"/>}}

In February 2011, the [[Democratic National Committee]] passed a resolution calling for an acceleration of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. Citing the Gallup poll released that month that found that the strong majority 72% of Americans favor action to "speed up the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan", the policy resolution called for "a swift withdrawal of US armed forces and military contractors in Afghanistan which must include a significant and sizable reduction no later than July 2011."<ref name="Afghanistan Withdrawal Resolution Passes Democratic National Committee Without Dissent">{{cite web|url=http://www.thenation.com/article/158945/afghanistan-withdrawal-resolution-passes-democratic-national-committee-without-dissen|title=Afghanistan Withdrawal Resolution Passes Democratic National Committee Without Dissent|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="The DNC Wants Out of Afghanistan">{{cite web|url=http://www.thenation.com/blog/158885/dnc-wants-out-afghanistan|title=The DNC Wants Out of Afghanistan|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

Many that have hopes in President Obama's presidency but oppose the war in Afghanistan are concerned that the war could derail plans for his presidency the way the [[Vietnam War]] ruined the presidency of [[Lyndon B. Johnson]].<ref name="An Open Letter to President Obama"/><ref name="A Voice Worth Heeding on Afghanistan">{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/05/us/05iht-letter.html?_r=1&em=&pagewanted=all|title=Letter From Washington - A Voice Worth Heeding on Afghanistan - NYTimes.com|website=[[The New York Times]] |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="Afghanistan – the proxy war">{{cite web|url=http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/10/11/afghanistan___the_proxy_war/|title=Afghanistan - the proxy war|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://host.madison.com/ct/news/opinion/column/amy_goodman/article_989eb18a-a2f0-11de-b971-001cc4c03286.html|title=Afghanistan war threatens to make us 'the evil we deplore'|author=Amy Goodman|work=madison.com|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/16/afghanistan.obama|title=Reassessing Obama's 'war of necessity'|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.hofstrachronicle.com/editorial-op-ed/eighth-year-of-afghan-war-should-be-the-last-1.644433|title=Eighth year of Afghan War should be the last|work=The Hofstra Chronicle|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{quote|As long as we are there, the war will continue, with disastrous consequences for all the things you want to do and we Americans need you to do.| [[William R. Polk]], in an [http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091019/polk open letter to President Obama]<ref name="US Lawmakers Question Afghanistan Strategy"/>}}

==Troop reductions and removals==

* On November 5, 2007, [[South Korea]]'s Defense Ministry announced that its 210-troop military deployment would be recalled despite the fact that Washington had asked [[Seoul]] to extend their deployment, which was scheduled to expire at the end of the year. South Korea's 150 military engineers and 60 military medics were to leave Afghanistan on December 14, 2007. The recall followed South Korea's promise to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2007 to secure the August 2007 release of [[2007 South Korean hostage crisis in Afghanistan|23 South Korean missionaries]] that had been kidnapped because of their country's involvement in the U.S.-led military efforts. The South Korean military deployment had been in Afghanistan approximately 5 years and 9 months starting in February 2002.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2007/11/05/South-Korean-troops-leaving-Afghanistan/UPI-79741194266854/|title=South Korean troops leaving Afghanistan|work=UPI|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2904395|title=Washington asks Seoul for money for Afghanistan|access-date=May 25, 2016}}</ref>

* In November 2007, Swiss Defence Minister [[Samuel Schmid]] announced the planned withdrawal of the last of its military deployment to Afghanistan that had started in 2003.<ref name="Switzerland ends military mission in Afghanistan">{{cite web|url=http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/news/social_affairs/Switzerland_ends_military_mission_in_Afghanistan.html?siteSect=204&sid=8773052&cKey=1203763097000&ty=nd|title=Switzerland ends military mission in Afghanistan|work=SWI Swissinfo.ch|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

* On December 19, 2007, the Netherlands announced that it would begin to remove Dutch troops from Afghanistan in 2010, with Dutch troops leaving Afghanistan from July 2010. Foreign Minister [[Maxime Verhagen]] stated, "I am certain that Dutch troops will leave in 2010." He also made clear, "I indicated that in writing ... to the NATO secretary general, who has confirmed it."<ref name="Netherlands confirms 2010 Afghanistan pullout">{{cite web|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/12/19/2122622.htm|title=Netherlands confirms 2010 Afghanistan pullout|work=ABC News|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

* In February 2008, Switzerland's last soldiers still in Afghanistan had returned home and its military deployment to Afghanistan since 2003 was officially concluded. The Swiss military contingent had been in Afghanistan approximately 4 years and 8 months starting in June 2003.<ref name="Switzerland ends military mission in Afghanistan"/>

* On September 10, 2008, Canadian Prime Minister [[Stephen Harper]] pledged that Canada will withdraw the bulk of its military forces in Afghanistan in 2011, saying that a decade of war is enough and, "You have to put an end date on these things." He acknowledged that neither the Canadian public nor the troops themselves had any appetite to stay longer in the war and said that only a small group of advisers might remain.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/harper-says-2011-end-date-for-afghanistan-mission-1.746890|title=Harper says 2011 'end date' for Afghanistan mission|date=September 10, 2008|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

* On September 6, 2009, [[The Independent]] [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/british-troop-numbers-to-be-cut-in-afghanistan-1782537.html reported] that British Prime Minister [[Gordon Brown]] had put the United States on notice that he planned to cut the number of British troops in Afghanistan by at least half within "three to five years, maximum". The partial troop withdrawal would bring British troop numbers in Afghanistan from over 9,000 to fewer than 5,000. On September 4, 2009, Brown had confirmed in a keynote speech that he was considering a short-term increase in British troops in Afghanistan as a prelude to a British exit.<ref name="British troop numbers to be cut in Afghanistan">{{cite web|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/british-troop-numbers-to-be-cut-in-afghanistan-1782537.html|title=British troop numbers to be cut in Afghanistan|work=The Independent|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

* On September 14, 2009, Canadian Prime Minister [[Stephen Harper]] reaffirmed that Canada would withdraw its troops in 2011 even if President [[Barack Obama]] asked him for an extension. A spokesperson for Harper said『Canada's position is clear – The military component of the mission ends in 2011.』Harper had first announced Canada's troop removal in 2008, stating that Canada had done its part after being in Afghanistan since after the 2001 U.S. invasion, and in [[Kandahar province|Kandahar]], one of Afghanistan's most dangerous provinces, since 2006.<ref name="Canadian PM says he won't extend Afghan mission">[https://archive.today/20090925011513/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/14/AR2009091402427_pf.html Canadian PM says he won't extend Afghan mission]</ref>

* On September 16, 2009, Japanese Prime Minister [[Yukio Hatoyama]] signalled through key cabinet choices that he would keep his election pledge to withdraw Japan's military support from the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan. Hatoyama appointed as his Defence Minister 71-year-old [[Toshimi Kitazawa]], a strong opponent of the country's military support for the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and included in his cabinet [[Mizuho Fukushima]], leader of his coalition partner, the [[Social Democratic Party (Japan)|Social Democratic Party]] (SDP), which is committed to upholding Japan's "peace" constitution and its explicit ban on the use of force in resolving international disputes. The appointments suggest that Japanese military ships providing fuel and water to U.S. and British naval vessels in the [[Indian Ocean]] will be called home when the current term of their deployment expires in February.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6836939.ece|title=Login|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

* On September 17, 2009, Italian Prime Minister [[Silvio Berlusconi]] said it would be best for foreign troops to leave Afghanistan soon. He also announced that he planned to bring home at least 500 of Italy's 2,800 troops deployed in Afghanistan "in the next few weeks". Italy had increased its troop level by 500 before Afghanistan's [[2009 Afghan presidential election|August 20 national election]]. A key coalition partner in Berlusconi's government, Reforms Minister [[Umberto Bossi]] said he hoped Italy's 2,800 troops could leave Afghanistan within 3 months by Christmas. Berlusconi's announcement followed the deaths of six Italian soldiers in a [[suicide bombing]] in [[Kabul]] the day before, which had brought to 20 the number of Italian troops that have been killed since Italy's troops arrived in Afghanistan in 2004.<ref name="Berlusconi: Best to exit Afghanistan soon">[https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/17/AR2009091700762_pf.html Berlusconi: Best to exit Afghanistan soon]{{dead link|date=June 2021|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=asSviGI5I3hc|title=Berlusconi Says Italy to Withdraw 500 Afghanistan Troops Soon|website=[[Bloomberg News]] |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{quote|We are all convinced it's best for everybody to get out soon.

| Italian Prime Minister [[Silvio Berlusconi]], September 17, 2009<ref name="Berlusconi: Best to exit Afghanistan soon"/>}}

* On September 22, 2009, British Prime Minister [[Gordon Brown]] insisted he was focused on cutting back on the number of British troops in Afghanistan as soon as Afghan security forces were able to carry out their own security duties. ''[[The Times]]'' had reported that Britain was considering deploying a further 1,000 troops to its contingent of 9,000 troops in Afghanistan in response to the report from the American commander of all foreign military forces in Afghanistan, U.S. General [[Stanley McChrystal]]. Brown had previously stated in a keynote speech that he was considering a short-term increase in British troops in Afghanistan as a prelude to a British exit. The British toll since the U.S.-led invasion in 2001 stood at 217 deaths.<ref name="British troop numbers to be cut in Afghanistan"/><ref name="UK's Brown seeks fewer UK troops in Afghanistan">[https://web.archive.org/web/20091001190757/http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j9_7k8qJTNQhlZw3eFUA8mNiiWwAD9ASAL2O0 UK's Brown seeks fewer UK troops in Afghanistan]</ref>

* On October 6, 2009, the Dutch parliament voted by a large majority to pull Dutch troops out of Afghanistan in August 2010 as scheduled and bring them home. The motion to respect the scheduled withdrawal date was drawn up by two of the three parties in the coalition government, and was voted for by a large majority of Dutch MPs, despite pressure by the United States again for a second extension of the Dutch military involvement in Afghanistan.<ref name="Parliament votes against new Afghan mission">{{cite web|url=http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2009/10/parliament_votes_against_new_a.php|title=Parliament votes against new Afghan mission|work=DutchNews.nl|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="Dutch Government Falls Over Stance on Troops">{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/21/world/europe/21dutch.html|title=Dutch Government Collapses Over Its Stance on Troops for Afghanistan|date=February 21, 2010|work=The New York Times|access-date=May 25, 2016}}</ref>

* On October 14, 2009, Japanese Defence Minister [[Toshimi Kitazawa]] said that Japan will end its Indian Ocean naval refuelling mission that supports the U.S.-led military campaign in Afghanistan. Kitazawa said: "We will calmly withdraw (our ships) when the law expires next January". While in opposition, Prime Minister [[Yukio Hatoyama]]'s party argued that Japan, officially [[pacifist]] since World War II, should not abet "American wars".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/98290b14-b818-11de-8ca9-00144feab49a.html|title=Japan to end Afghan refuelling mission|work=Financial Times|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20100412074624/http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jTGM0WoCnNY3iJKIiZgVFhtu4vQw Japan to end Afghan refuelling mission in January]</ref>

* On January 6, 2010, Canadian Prime Minister [[Stephen Harper]] made clear that virtually all Canadian soldiers will be out of Afghanistan by the end of 2011, stating: "We will not be undertaking any activities that require any kind of military presence, other than the odd guard guarding an embassy." He emphasized again, "The bottom line is that the military mission will end in 2011."<ref>[https://windsorstar.com/news/Afghan+mission+strictly+civilian+after+2011/2413812/story.html Afghanistan will be 'strictly civilian mission' after 2011, PM says]</ref><ref>[http://www.canada.com/story_print.html?id=2414456 Afghan Pullout Final: PM]</ref>

* In February 2010, the Deputy Prime Minister of the Netherlands, [[Wouter Bos]], promised to bring Dutch troops home from Afghanistan by the end of the year, as scheduled. The Dutch public, as well as the Dutch Parliament, favor the withdrawal of their military from Afghanistan. The Netherlands is also facing a forecasted 2010 budget [[Government budget deficit|deficit]] of 6.1% of [[gross domestic product|GDP]].<ref name="Dutch Parliament Debates Afghanistan">{{cite web|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703315004575073394281448752?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_world|title=Dutch Parliament Debates Afghanistan|author=John W. Miller in Brussels and Maarten Van Tartwijk in Amsterdam|date=February 19, 2010|work=WSJ|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref> Bos reiterated to Dutch voters the pledge he had already made to them in 2007, saying at a party meeting:

{{quote|By the end of this year, the last soldier should have left Uruzghan. We're keeping our promise to the Dutch people.

| Deputy Prime Minister of the Netherlands [[Wouter Bos]], February 2010<ref name="Dutch Parliament Debates Afghanistan"/>}}

* On February 21, 2010, the Dutch coalition government of Prime Minister [[Jan Peter Balkenende]] collapsed when Balkenende, under entreaties from the United States, tried to extend the Dutch military presence in Afghanistan yet again, despite the government having previously promised Dutch voters that troops would be brought home in August 2010. As in many parts of Europe, the war in Afghanistan has been increasingly unpopular with voters in the Netherlands. The fall of the Balkenende government over the issue made it all but guaranteed that Dutch troops will be gone from Afghanistan by the end of the year. A spokesman for the Dutch Ministry of Defense stated: "The military mission will stop the 1st of August. They have time until the end of the year to pick up their gear and their stuff and bring it back to the Netherlands."<ref name="Parliament votes against new Afghan mission"/><ref name="Dutch Government Falls Over Stance on Troops"/><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-fg-dutch21-2010feb21,0,1226895.story|title=Dutch political crisis over war|work=Los Angeles Times|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

* On June 21, 2010, Poland's acting president and speaker of parliament, [[Bronislaw Komorowski]], stated: "2011 should be the year for winding down Poland's engagement and 2012 should be the year we pull out." The front-runner in Poland's presidential race, he stated: "If I win these elections, I wish to start curbing our engagement and then to pull out (the troops) during my presidency." Grzegorz Napieralski, the third-place candidate being courted by both leading candidates in the tight race, reiterated his party's demand for an Afghan pullout "as soon as possible." Polish Prime Minister [[Donald Tusk]], whose ruling party is backing Komorowski's presidential bid, had also said in June that Poland would press the U.S. and NATO coalition to draw up plans to end the mission as soon as possible.<ref>[http://uk.ibtimes.com/articles/30131/20100623/afghan-war-moves-centre-stage-in-polish-election.htm Afghan war moves centre-stage in Polish election]</ref>

* On June 24, 2010, Poland urged its NATO allies to draft plans to leave Afghanistan and announced that Polish troops would be brought home by 2012 regardless of what other countries decided. Following a National Security Countil meeting devoted to Afghanistan, Acting President Bronislaw Komorowski told a news conference that he had asked the government to work out a national strategy for pulling out of the war, with 2012 as the absolute deadline. A senior Polish security official said that NATO was heading towards a "strategic catastrophe" in Afghanistan. Stanislaw Koziej, head of Poland's [[National Security Bureau (Poland)|National Security Bureau]] stated: "NATO is strategically exhausted by Afghanistan ... We must seek a way out of this situation."<ref name="Poland sets 2012 Afghanistan pull-out deadline">{{cite web|url=http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LDE65N1EL.htm|title=Thomson Reuters Foundation|author=Thomson Reuters Foundation|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>{{better source needed|date=April 2013}}

{{quote|2012 is the deadline when it comes to Poland's presence in Afghanistan.

| Acting President of Poland [[Bronislaw Komorowski]], June 24, 2010<ref name="Poland sets 2012 Afghanistan pull-out deadline"/>}}

* On August 1, 2010, the Netherlands officially ended its military involvement of 1,950 troops in Afghanistan. The withdrawal came with the collapse of the Dutch government of Prime Minister [[Jan Peter Balkenende]] earlier in the year when Balkenende, under entreaties from the United States, tried to extend the Dutch military presence in Afghanistan yet again despite opposition from the public. During the Netherlands' four-year involvement in the war, 24 Dutch troops were killed and 140 were wounded. The Dutch pullout is being followed by other withdrawals of foreign military forces from Afghanistan. Canada is withdrawing its entire military force of 2,800 troops next year in 2011, Poland in 2012, and the United Kingdom in 2014 or 2015.<ref name="Parliament votes against new Afghan mission"/><ref name="Dutch Government Falls Over Stance on Troops"/><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-10829837|title=BBC News - Dutch troops end Afghanistan deployment|work=BBC News|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/02/2970353.htm|title=Dutch troops leave Afghanistan|work=ABC News|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

* On November 20, 2010, NATO members signed a deal to begin reducing troops in Afghanistan in 2011 and hand over security control to Afghan forces by 2014, if conditions were favourable. However, American officials described the date as "an aspirational timeline" and NATO officials said "This isn't a calendar-based process." The United Kingdom, however, made clear to its NATO allies that after 2014 they would not be involved in combat operations:<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-our-afghan-exit-is-now-overdue-2139648.html|title=Leading article: Our Afghan exit is now overdue|work=The Independent|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref name="Nato Leaders Sign Deal On Afghan Security">{{cite web|url=http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Nato-Summit-Leaders-Make-Deal-On-Afghanistan-Security-After-Agreeing-Missile-Shield-For-Europe/Article/201011315819944?lpos=World_News_Top_Stories_Header_0&lid=ARTICLE_15819944_Nato_Summit%3A_Leaders_Make_Deal_On_Afghanistan_Security_After_Agreeing_Missile_Shield_For_Europe|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101123010633/http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Nato-Summit-Leaders-Make-Deal-On-Afghanistan-Security-After-Agreeing-Missile-Shield-For-Europe/Article/201011315819944?lpos=World_News_Top_Stories_Header_0&lid=ARTICLE_15819944_Nato_Summit%3A_Leaders_Make_Deal_On_Afghanistan_Security_After_Agreeing_Missile_Shield_For_Europe|url-status=dead|archive-date=November 23, 2010|title=Error|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

* On November 20, 2010, British Prime Minister [[David Cameron]] pledged to withdraw all British combat troops from Afghanistan after the end of 2014, saying "This is a firm deadline which we will meet." Defence Secretary Liam Fox also underlined the Prime Minister's commitment that Britain's combat role in Afghanistan would be over by 2015.<ref name="Nato Leaders Sign Deal On Afghan Security"/><ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Nato-Summit-Leaders-Make-Deal-On-Afghanistan-Security-After-Agreeing-Missile-Shield-For-Europe/Article/201011315819944?lpos=World_News_Top_Stories_Header_0&lid=ARTICLE_15819944_Nato_Summit:_Leaders_Make_Deal_O|archive-url=https://www.webcitation.org/5uOjLD7KE?url=http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Nato-Summit-Leaders-Make-Deal-On-Afghanistan-Security-After-Agreeing-Missile-Shield-For-Europe/Article/201011315819944?lpos=World_News_Top_Stories_Header_0&lid=ARTICLE_15819944_Nato_Summit:_Leaders_Make_Deal_O|url-status=dead|archive-date=November 21, 2010|title=WebCite query result|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{quote|Let's be clear, this is a deadline and I believe the British public deserve a deadline.

We have been in Afghanistan for nine years and we have paid a high price.

| British Prime Minister [[David Cameron]], November 20, 2010<ref name="Nato Leaders Sign Deal On Afghan Security"/>}}

* On January 10, 2011, former French Prime Minister [[Dominique de Villepin]] called for an earlier withdrawal of France's troops from Afghanistan than 2014. Opposition politician [[Segolene Royale]] renewed a call for a "democratic debate" and for a fixed withdrawal date.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.leparisien.fr/flash-actualite-politique/afghanistan-des-voix-s-elevent-pour-accelerer-le-retrait-des-forces-francaises-10-01-2011-1221170.php|title=Afghanistan: des voix s'élèvent pour accélérer le retrait des forces françaises|date=February 6, 2015|work=leparisien.fr|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

* On June 23, 2011, U.S. President [[Barack Obama]] announced that the US combat role in Afghanistan would end completely by 2014, with the United States needing to regroup and concentrate on its problems at home. He announced that 10,000 U.S. troops would be withdrawn in 2011, another 23,000 by the middle of 2012, and then "at a steady pace" until 2014, completing a transition from combat to "support". He stated: "This is the beginning – but not the end – of our effort to wind down this war."<ref name="Obama announces US troops in Afghanistan will be home by 2014">[http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/obama-announces-us-troops-in-afghanistan-will-be-home-by-2014/story-e6freuy9-1226080527852 Obama announces US troops in Afghanistan will be home by 2014]</ref>

{{quote|Over the last decade, we have spent a [[#Financial cost of the war to taxpayers and Western economies|trillion dollars]] on war, at a time of rising debt and hard economic times. ... Now, we must invest in America's greatest resource – our people. We must unleash innovation that creates new jobs and industry, while living within our means. We must rebuild our infrastructure and find new and clean sources of energy. ... America, it is time to focus on nation building here at home.

| U.S. President [[Barack Obama]], June 23, 2011<ref name="Obama announces US troops in Afghanistan will be home by 2014"/>}}

* On July 6, 2011, British Prime Minister [[David Cameron]] announced that 500 British troops would return home in 2012. France and Belgium also recently announced troop reductions.<ref name="Canada ends combat mission in Afghanistan"/><ref name="Kandahar then and now"/>

* On July 7, 2011, Canada officially ended its direct involvement in any combat operations in Afghanistan, withdrawing its nearly 3,000 troops. Prime Minister [[Stephen Harper]] had pledged in 2008 and 2009 to withdraw all Canadian military troops from Afghanistan, only to then announce in 2010 that 950 Canadian troops would stay until 2014 to train Afghan military and police forces. The Canadian government informed NATO that its trainers would not operate in dangerous parts of the country or in the field with Afghan troops: Some 350 will be support staff or will work in NATO headquarters offices in [[Kabul]], with the rest serving mainly as mentors or advisors within heavily fortified training centres in Kabul and in two small groups at schools in the generally peaceful cities of [[Herat]] and [[Mazar-e Sharif]].<ref name="Canada ends combat mission in Afghanistan">{{cite web|url=http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/canada-ends-combat-mission-in-afghanistan/story-e6frfku0-1226090186591|title=Canada ends combat mission in Afghanistan|work=NewsComAu|access-date=May 25, 2016}}</ref><ref name="Kandahar then and now">{{cite web|url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/many-in-kandahar-fear-looming-disaster-as-canada-withdraws/article2092248/singlepage/#articlecontent|title=Many in Kandahar fear looming disaster as Canada withdraws|work=The Globe and Mail|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/11/11/greg-weston-troop-extension.html|title=Afghanistan 'training mission' doesn't add up|date=November 15, 2010|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/canadian-combat-troops-exit-afghanistan---canadian-trainers-enter/article2089121/|title=Canadian combat troops exit Afghanistan - Canadian trainers enter|work=The Globe and Mail|access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

* On July 12, 2011, French President [[Nicolas Sarkozy]] announced that France would withdraw 1,000 troops by the end of 2012, and all its combat units by the end of 2014, speeding up its withdrawal along with other countries. He stated "You have to know how to end a war." The majority of people in France want their military withdrawn from Afghanistan.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.reuters.com/assets/print?aid=USTRE76B1IV20110712|title=Business & Financial News, Breaking US & International News - Reuters.com|website=[[Reuters]] |access-date=February 6, 2015}}</ref>

{{col-begin}}

{{col-break}}

* [[Protests against the war in Afghanistan|Protests against the invasion of Afghanistan]]

* [[British casualties in Afghanistan since 2001]]

* [[German Armed Forces casualties in Afghanistan]]

* [[Canadian Forces casualties in Afghanistan]]

<!--

* [[Guantanamo Bay detention camp]]

* [[Guantanamo suicide attempts]]

* [[Minors detained in the global war on terror]]

-->

{{col-break}}

* [[2009 Afghan presidential election]]

* [[Opium production in Afghanistan]]

* [[CIA activities in Afghanistan]]

* [[Soviet–Afghan War]]

* [[Afghanistan conflict (1978–present)]]

* [[Demography of Afghanistan]]

* [[Third Anglo-Afghan War|Anglo-Afghan Wars]]

* [[Project for a New American Century]]

* [[Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline]]

{{col-end}}