Freetrader2: "Stewart believes, with some justification I think, that neither Al Qeada nor the Taliban would be in any position to 'take over' Afghanistan if we shrank our footprint. I can't say that he is absolutely right, but that is certainly a strong alternative view."

One reason I find this argument appealing is because it extracts us from the hubris of operating as the chess master of the world. Stewart at least understands that the "board" of Afghanistan is one of complex dimensions that we cannot master with any certainty, let alone in perpetuity. Why are domestic political issues always about limits while foreign policy initiatives, by design or stealth, wave wands expecting to create whole new worlds?