@wandeljw,
For the sake of a short-hand description of my political leanings from back in the '60s - '70s, I would categorize myself as a 'dove'. That being said I'm also a veteran of USAF from '70-'74.
I feel that once the military has asserted its presence, there should be some clear-minded and achievable goal...a game plan.. a mission. Without a clear mission or goal, no good or short involvement can EVER result. Bankrupting the economy is hardly justifiable - not mention the immorality of such an effort.
With Osama bin Laden dead and gone what is the mission? To spy on Taliban..Al-Qadah?
Can it be the surveillance of the Taliban? Perhaps, but is that worth committing 50-100k troops? Is that number of troops needed to man the listening stations? No way!
If the goal is nation-building I feel that history will show (and has shown) that effort is doomed to failure. Is the goal to sway the hearts and minds of the locals with their presence? If that effort
was the intent, it was effectively torpedoed by this sick massacre - PERMANENTLY.
But...I think that no such mission statement has been made if the alleged goal is meant to curtail the drug-smuggling. It's a well-known area for opium. That would
almost be a worthwhile justification for the presence ...BUT...? Would doing so cut off the money supply to the Taliban and other bad actors? No need to mention the fact that CIA supported the drug cartel in this area and Columbia as well.
Also, I've never heard such a justification or goal statement come out of anyone's mouth in an official position in Wash DC or from any talking heads.