What are the alternatives? I see the two - USA will micromanage and babysit Afghanistan and after a while will run away complaining about savagery and lack of thankfulness from the natives. The second is to split Afghanistan along the etnic lines (not very likely).
But I do not agree with you. Before the Soviet intervention Afghanistan was a state with an ineffectual government based on the compromise and some degree of consensus. This is the condition which could be achieved if the imperial ambitions and pride were not on the way. Anyway, YOU will have your way. People like me have little impact on the real decisions.
You've pointed out the problem. There's a third, slightly better alternative, and as far as I know, this is the president's intent: the international peacekeeping force, which also happens to include the wonderful extremist-sympathizer EU-whiners can do the babysitting. This takes care of two problems:
1: The leaders of the EU will have no further opportunity of accusing the US of summarily killing orphaned puppies and kittens. They will be forced to ( privately, anyway ) see just how incredibly complicated the entire Asian situation really is.
2: The US and it's close allies, like the Brits, will be free to go after terrorism elsewhere, without having our hands tied by moonlighting as international nannies.
"Before the Soviet intervention Afghanistan was a state with an ineffectual government based on the compromise and some degree of consensus."
You seem to be confusing self-motivated compromise by politicians and mini dictators - pretty much the same thing there - with a consensus by the Afghan people.
Yes, things were somewhat better during the period of Soviet INFLUENCE over the Afghan governmant. When the Soviets tried to TAKE OVER the country...well...you know the rest. They ran into the same culture we are dealing with right now.
There is a radical new idea slowly percolating through the conciousness of the Arab populace: representative government.
I wonder how it'll turn out?