This is childish!

What is "childish"? US demanding "clear results" in Afghanistan reforming itself, that's what.

Hilary Clinton went to Kabul to reinforce Obama's public message demanding better public governance. Read this.

I have a naive question. Rather two. First, how do you measure "better"? Second, suppose Kabul failed to pass the hurdle of what constitute minimum acceptable reforms, what then? US will pull out immediately?

Let's not kid ourselves. US presence in Kabul must rest on unambiguous national security interests clearly articulated by Washington DC and understand by the American people.

The notion of "nation building" turning Afghanistan into any resemblance of a democratic society is naive and is a non-starter. If Afghan people's support is essential to US effort there, and if that support is not in place, US should leave irrespective of what "reforms" Kabul could or could not engineer.

Frankly, when the head of state's brother is the largest opium dealer in Afghanistan, talks of meaningful reforms in Kabul are sophomoric.

US must also be clear why it is so paramount to defeat the Taliban. Wasn't the original goal the capture of Osama bin Laden? Remember the Taliban were at one point fighting comrades of the US against the Soviets.

If finding and killing bin Laden could not be achieved by the presence of nearly 70,000 GI's, not counting NATO troops, another 40,000 GI's would find bin Laden?

If Obama were to accept General McChrystal's additional troop request, we would be stationing over 100,000 troops to find one aging terrorist whose location we have failed to find in 8 years.

If a script writer were to write that into a movie proposal, he will never find work again in Hollywood!