There were no suggestions as to what "win" might mean in Afghanistan and no opinions as to whether it was possible. Without clear, achievable goals is it morally defensible to spend money and lives in a situation which by definition is and will be lost?

Is using the military in an unwinnable situation responsible? And for how many years?

"Well, we're fighting them over there and not over here." That's an anticipated answer. A response would be that they don't have the ability to invade this country. And as for terrorist activity, they are doing what they can over here as it is. It's not "either-or", both efforts or either one can be a goal of those folks.

Beware of those who advocate war for the sake of war and not "winning". Usually they are suggesting other people's children and grandchildren not only should fight that war but pay for it.

Arf