I truly believe American forces should be primarily focusing on our operations in Afghanistan, not Iraq. More to the point, I believe America should be concentrating the bulk of its fighting forces in whatever region our intelligence tells us Osama Bin Laden is at. Currently, sources indicate he is operating in the area of the Pakistan/Afghanistan borders. However, Bin Laden is very mobile and has a large and loyal intelligence network, making him difficult to track. This isn't to say I think we should completely abandon our efforts in Iraq, but I'll address that a little later.

America's main goal should be to find Osama and bring him to justice, whether that be a speedy battlefiled execution or a long trial with its ensuing results. Iraq, having a secondary importance, should be a secondary objective. Somewhere along the way, we've gotten turned around a little and have our priorities mixed up. Not to say that our efforts in Iraq are unimportant or pointless, but they shouldn’t come before finding Bin Laden.

Whatever one’s thoughts on the war in Iraq, most everyone feels we are justified having troops in Afghanistan. The attacks of September 11 occurred prior to any credible issues we had with either the Iraqis or Baath Party, making them the first issue to attend to. For the last few decades, American military doctrine says that our armed forces should be able to fight two major wars on different fronts as well as conduct a few lesser confrontations. Unfortunately, some additional problems seem to have cropped up between the drawing board and the battlefield. Some of these issues include prolonged fighting leading to battle fatigue, difficult to find opponents, a growing segment of the population with desire for isolationism and ever-weakening stomach for fighting and collateral damage.

Dividing our forces for a short period of time, perhaps a year or two, is not only acceptable and viable, but necessary. This idea is especially true with if our opponents are in the form of standing, uniformed armies. Prolonged battle against two different, although similar, enemies who don't wear any kind of recognizable uniforms and can easily disappear into the general population is something very different. We can't simply strike at a central point or destroy a nerve center and make our foes capitulate this time. Instead, we must carpet their lands like hoards of invading ants and explore every house and crack in the earth for hidden enemies. This is a long, painful and tedious process, especially if we lack the personnel for the job.

For an asymetrical war, as these are, we need more boots on the ground, no matter where that ground should be. Some say if we pull out of Iraq, the country will implode and be worse than before. Insurgents, thugs and trouble-makers will fill the void we've left behind and everthing we've worked for will be lost. I agree with this assessment completely. It's very clear that the Iraqi police and military are not nearly efficient enough in their new roles and that we can't abandon them. We can still leave a sizable contingent of troops there to continue mopping up, training and advising for the foreseeable future. We can also lean on our allies, NATO and the U.N. to pitch in and provide peace-keeping forces. This would allow us to pull the main bulk of our forces out and help out in Afghanistan. Once we've saturated Afghanistan with our troops, finding Bin Laden should get a lot easier.

There are a number of people who have compared the war in Iraq with the Viet Nam conflict. While I can't say I agree or disagree with this idea, here is something to consider:  After America pulled it's forces out of Vietnam, our South Vietnamese allies were left alone while communist forces swept in. They, and others who worked side by side with American forces paid a heavy price for our withdrawal. Torture and murder were commonplace, as well as lengthy jail terms, confiscation of property and continuous harassment for those we left behind. This episode in U.S. history has been a shameful disgrace and will likely repeat itself if U.S. forces pull out of Iraq too soon or too quickly.  Now that American forces are in Iraq, extracting them will be a difficult proposition.

There are a lot of addages referencing the idea of trying to follow two seperate paths and winding up nowhere.  We must follow one path until the job is completed, only then moving to the next. Dividing our forces, we can only prolong our problems. However, the U.S. need to find forces to maintain a presence in Iraq, one way or another.