= new reply since forum marked as read
For at least the last five years the majority of Afghans had wanted foreign soldiers OUT. This includes groups who OPPOSE the Taliban (Who tend to be Pashtun, like the present President of Afghanistan). The reason is simple, once the foreign soldiers are out, the native leaders will work out a compromise among themselves (Which they had done since before the days of Alexander the Great).
You saw this with the Taliban, who worked with everyone is Afghanistan except for the "Northern Alliance" (Mostly Tajik) who were receiving massive Russian support, and the Shiite Hazara who had Iranian support.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazara_people
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tajik_people
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Alliance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtun_people
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtun_tribes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category
ashtun_tribes
While the Taliban did they best to suppress the Hazara, the main source of attack by the Taliban were on the Northern Alliance.
From 1933 to 1973 Afghanistan was ruled by the King of Afghanistan, a man hand picked by Stalin to Rule Afghanistan:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Zahir_Shah
I Loved the Wikipedia article on him, how he supported a rebellion in China while ignoring that the same rebellion was being supported by Stalin.
I bring the King up for his overthrow in 1973 started the long down hill race of Afghanistan. In my opinion he was overthrown by party hacks in Moscow because, unlike Stalin, they could not see how a Communist Government in Moscow can have a king as a vassal. Thus The king was replaced by his cousin in a more acceptable Republic, then in 1978 that Republic was overthrown by a Communist lead Government. The reason for the coup was the Republic of Afghanistan had unleashed a slow but steady rebellion that by the late 1970s was getting out of hand. The Coup made the situation worse, so the Russian Army had to move in in 1979. Thus Fighting in Afghanistan started in 1973 and except for the brief period of Taliban Rule, has been constant since 1973.
Most Afghans remember the Taliban rule as the only time of peace in their lives. You had unrest in the County before the 1979 Russian Invasion, the problems during the Russian Invasion, the unrest subsequent to the Russian withdraw in 1980, the period of the surviving Communist Afghan State, 1989-1992, and continued unrest as the "Victors" of the Afghan Civil War fought over the remains of Afghanistan till the Taliban took over in 1996 (The Taliban started to take over Phustan areas of Afghanistan in 1994).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_war_in_Afghanistan_(1989%E2%80%931992)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban
In 2002, as a result of 9/11 the US joined with the Northern Alliance (and unofficially Iran and the Hazara) to attack Afghanistan. The US used Massive Air Attacks and paratroopers while the Northern Alliance pushed South in an Armor Thrust (I have my own opinion where that Armor Division came from, i.e. Russia or Russian paid for from Tajikistan, but I can NOT find anything to support my suspicion or disprove them). The US Media concentrated on the US troops and Special Forces and ignored the Armor Thrust for it was NOT American Lead. My suspicion that the Armor Thrust was Russian was almost confirmed when it refused to go anywhere after it took Kabul. i.e. it refused to go anywhere where the advantages of tanks was NOT overwhelming i.e. where they may lose tanks for the Taliban was NOT going to try to stop the armor onslaught where all the armor had to do was maneuver around them. The Taliban wanted to take on the Armor in the mountains where such armor has two choices, attack head on, or retreat, the mountains restricted the ability to maneuver around defensive positions.
After the 2002 invasion, Afghan has been in constant conflict, thus the only time of peace since the 1970s was 1995-2002 when the Taliban ruled and its only armed enemy was restricted to the northern part of Afghanistan. The rest of Afghanistan was peaceful. We may not like the Taliban, but they showed they could produce peace, something no other government since the 1970s has been able to do.
Once you understand the history of Afghanistan since 1973, you come to accept why most Afghans want all foreign soldiers out of Afghanistan. Such a move will force not only the Taliban but the groups that support the present government of Afghanistan to work out a deal. Presently they can not for the Foreign soldiers are a wild card that each side has to take into consideration. As a wild card, no one can count of the Foreign soldiers following what the natives agree to, thus no agreement can be made. It is the US Soldiers and other foreign soldiers that are preventing a deal from being reached and this is accepted by the natives.
Now, the deal will not be a written deal, it will be like what the Taliban had with the Northern Alliance. Limited infiltration, do to the fact the Northern Alliance were NOT Pashtun for the Taliban had used Tribal nature of Pashtun to infiltrate and take over the rest of Afghanistan. In affect, accepting the facts on the ground as those facts are three months after the US withdraws or whenever the sides come to a situation where actual fighting gains nothing.
Right now, the Taliban sees that it can expand whenever the Foreign Soldiers leave, thus not willing to come to any deal. The present Afghan Government has reached the same conclusion, as has the minority Tajikis and Hazara tribes. Thus the foreign troops (including US Troops) that are the dis-stabilizing element in Afghanistan, not the Taliban, the Tajiks, the Hazara nor the present government of Afghanistan.
That is the POLITICAL situation in Afghanistan today. To have a stable Afghanistan, the US has to do what the Soviet Union did in 1979, withdraw and leave the Afghan people figure out how to achieve peace.
And the polls have been consistent, they want the US out. As to how quickly the US took over Afghanistan, the Taliban made a decision that they could NOT defeat such an invasion so they headed for cover and waited to reemerge after the conquest. They did this several times during Russian offensives in the 1980s, thus an effective tactic as long as they have support of the people of Afghanistan (no support, they could NEVER have reemerged). The Taliban like the Viet Cong in Vietnam, knew they could NOT stop a US military push, and thus did not try. Instead they waited for the US to go onto other actions (i.e. Iraq) and then came out fighting.
Remember the Soviet Union went into Afghanistan almost the same way we did, with overwhelming power. The problems for the Soviets was AFTERWARD, not during the conquest of Afghanistan. The same with the US in Afghanistan, you can always find someone in any country to support your invasion (and often the same people no matter who is the invader, they want power more then they love they country).
The classic example is the US war with Mexico 1846-1848 and the French intervention 1862-1868. The US went into Mexico with overwhelming force, took Mexico City and had someone sign a peace treaty and pulled all US forces out of Mexico by the end of 1848. The French went in in 1862 and decided to stay and support the Government made up of mostly of the leadership of Mexico. Against this government, the Government that the French had attacked set itself up in the Interior and started a long and protracted Guerrilla campaign against the French. The French seeing the writing on the walls withdrew in 1866 and the Government they supported quickly collapsed.
Notice the difference, in the US invasion of Mexico the goals of the US was limited and once achieved the US had no intentions of staying in Mexico. Thus the US view the war was a victory and Mexico view it as a massive defeat. AS to the French invasion, the opposite is the view, Mexico view it as a Victory and the French view it as a defeat. Why the difference? The US never wanted to rule Mexico, and thus willing to withdraw quickly. The French wanted to rule Mexico through their Mexican allies and the Mexican People opposed such foreign rule (even some of the people who had invited the French in, defected to the other side once the French made it clear they did not want to leave).
The same situation is what is happening in Afghanistan. Many of the people of Afghanistan wanted the Taliban out, but that does NOT mean they wanted the US in. Thus you had support for the Invasion BUT NOT FOR THE FOREIGN TROOPS STAYING. The US should have done what Senator Pell told President Johnson in the 1960s as to Vietnam, declare Victory and pull out. If the Government of Vietnam fell afterward blame it on them for the US had "Won" the war against the Viet Cong.
All wars are Political. Why you go to war, how you wage war, and how you end a war are all political decisions (Read Clausewitz who makes this perfectly clear in his book "On War"
. Clausewitz goes on and says the Political reasons for all three may be different (and often are). Clausewitz is one of the first authors to attack the concept of "Excessive Politics in Military operations" on the grounds all military operations are the result of politics. Clausewitz goes on and said when you hear someone say "Excessive Politics in Military operations", they are NOT complaining of actual politics in Military operations, but complaining of the POLITIC Policy that is leading to that Military operation.
It is clear that the Political situation in Afghanistan calls for a US pull out. Once the US forces are out, some sort of peace will occur in Afghanistan. It may be a peace like under the Taliban, but to quote Ben Franklin "A Bad Peace is better then a Good War" and right now Afghanistan prefers a "Bad Peace" under the Taliban, then a "Good War" under the present government of Afghanistan.
We should just pick up and let them go back to Taliban rule. That really worked well for the country, particularly for girls and women.
I think we all know what happens to insolent U.S. puppets, Hamid. 
