The Experts Are Split On What Should Be The Long-Term Role For The U.S. In Afghanistan

U.S. troops assess damage to an armored vehicle in a NATO-led international security force in Afghanistan's Jalalabad province, Aug. 24, 2014.

Pundits Split Over Long-Term US Role in Afghanistan -- Voice of America

While auditors rush to finish reviewing ballots in Afghanistan’s disputed June 14 presidential runoff election before incumbent Hamid Karzai leaves office, some American foreign policy experts are looking beyond the political standoff to a deadline that will end U.S. military involvement in the war-torn country.

That, they say, could further complicate Afghanistan’s security.

For years, Washington and Kabul could not come to terms on a bilateral security agreement, which would have determined the scope of what U.S. troops could do after 2014. So in May, U.S. President Barack Obama announced a unilateral plan: The United States would reduce its troop levels while continuing to train and equip Afghan national security forces for another two years.

Read more ....

My Comment: The pundits may be split .... but the U.S. role in Afghanistan has already been mapped out. A U.S. military presence numbering in the thousands. Military aid coupled with a heavy presence of numerous intelligence agencies. Economic aid. Political support. In short .... everything the same but with a smaller footprint.