Questions for FPI

The Foreign Policy Initiative has circulated what it dubs the Case for a Fully Resourced Counter-Insurgency in Afghanistan, where they attempt to rebut assertions raised by skeptics of nation building there. Well worth a look.

There are, however, some rather important questions that are left untouched. They are:

* Would a fully resourced counter-insurgency prevent or seriously reduce terror attacks against the United States from Islamic radicals? If we "win" in Afghanistan, would the Fort Hood shooting not have occurred? Would radicals in London not have hatched a plot to bomb transatlantic airliners?

* If counter-insurgency is the American template for beating Islamic terrorism, will it be applied in Somalia, particularly if al Qaeda flees there?

* Why does Afghanistan warrant such an out-sized claim on American resources, given that al Qaeda's ability to launch mass-casualty terrorist attacks has been severely diminished? Are America's other foreign policy priorities - including relations with China, Russia and India - less significant than the battle against the Taliban in Afghanistan?

* How many terrorist attacks against the U.S. homeland have been thwarted by U.S. troops operating inside Afghanistan, and how many have been thwarted by intelligence operatives outside the country?

* And finally, why should we believe that Pakistan would be at risk if we were to withdraw from Afghanistan? Doesn't Pakistan, to this day, cultivate the Afghan Taliban for its own ends?

Inquiring minds want to know.

(AP Photos)