With a new White House occupant likely to strengthen the US focus there, Afghanistan is a test to Europe's capacity to be a reliable and unified transatlantic partner.

So, that's the need to fight in Afghanistan. Not to actually achieve anything (and god knows we're certainly not achieving anything at the moment) but simply to demonstrate our blind obedience to the whims of the White House.

But he starts the argument with a lie;-

The battle for the hearts and minds of the Afghan people will determine the success or failure of the mission. But in our haste to win the support of Afghans, we forget that this is a battle that must be fought at home too.

"Our haste to win the support of the afghans...". Excuse me. Is this some variant of "The floggings will continue until morale improves" ? How does our behaviour of destroying villages to prevent them being used by the enemy help ? Or the torture that goes on at the airbases ? Of generally behaving as being above the law even in areas that are supposedly liberated ? Of bombing wedding parties with seemingly gay abandon ?
Of destroying the only cash crop they can grow ?

all the while never addressing the systematic corruption in the afghan govt that renders most afghanis lives as nightmares of injustice and graft.

Yet somehow we in europe are supposed to ignore the blatant contradictory and self-defeating nature of our efforts in Afghanistan and ssport our troops on yet more widespread and pointless efforts that endup going in circles for the simple reason that there is no strategy, no political objective or control that would enable us to believe it's worthwhile.

right now we just seem to be on some random killing spree on behalf of a dictator. and we're suposed to support this barbarity ?

Not. In. My. Name

keep to the Fen Causeway