Although Afghanistan was always the more challenging theater than Iraq — landlocked, opium, no ports, few resources, difficult terrain, nearby nuclear Iran, high rates of illiteracy — Obama has at least as good chances of success as did George Bush with the 2007–8 with surge in Iraq. He enjoys higher ratings. The Republican opposition will support him in a way the Democrats did not Bush. There is not a furious anti-war movement in the fashion of the “General Betray Us” sort. We have gained invaluable experience in counter-insurgency, and General Petraeus remains in theater command. We can build on victory in Iraq that greatly demoralized al-Qaeda and in time may, in counter-intuitive fashion, prove to be a great drawback to Iran. For all the escalating violence, Afghanistan is still relatively quiet in comparison to the dark days in Iraq — our fatalities over the eight-year war there total less than those Americans lost in Iraq in 2007 alone. The decision is critical since it, rightly or wrongly, transcends even Afghanistan, but touches on everything from the recently exposed terrorist plots in Colorado and New York to nuclear proliferation in the Mideast.

The president’s challenge is largely political — he must endure anger from his base and will not have a majority of the public with him, at least initially. So far Obama has bucked the polls in pushing several issues, but never when simultaneously at odds with his core supporters. It would help if General Jones and Secretary Clinton, and not just the president and his regional czars, would get out more, and began making the case for stabilizing Afghanistan — if indeed they believe in such a mission that would require additional troops.