I don't blame our NATO allies for giving up on this ridiculous war. We went in five years ago to capture Bin Laden and round up Al Qaeda. We let Bin Laden escape and despite capturing hundreds of Al Qaeda suspects none have even been given the chance to prove their innocence. We're now left fighting a pointless and bloody war that we cannot win in a country that historically has proven resistant to invaders and impossible to occupy.

Mark, Newcastle, England,

The Continentals are again shirking and we're . . . . . surprised?

It is consistently the English-speaking world that saves wayward countries from themselves, be the country Afghanistan or France herself. Though I cringe when I read US and UK citizen complaint about the burden imposed by countering terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan (they are linked, dear friends, and incessant denials won't change that), I am delighted, proud, and energized that I descend from and am part of an Anglo-American culture and civilization that has defeated (1) Nazism (let's not forget that we had to save France after her surrender), (2) Communism as a world movement (though these pests seem bent on returning in disquise), and soon (3) radical Islam. Modern war critics are our contemporary Lord Haw Haws. Silly people. They barely deserve to be defended, but I guess we must.

Christopher Bakes, Sacramento, California

When you're conned by so called allies like the US & UK leaders is it any wonder other countries are not willing to go into Afghanistan. Although they've never been involved there before unlike the British and the Russians, they know from history its a no win situation and or no value to them whatsoever. The strange part in all of this is that the USA charged into Afghanistan with some legitimacy after 9/11 but then got distracted in Iraq on something that had nothing to do with 9/11. If Osama and his bunch are such a world threat just where does Bush think he's hiding and why is he concentrating on Iraq. The best option would be to let the Afghanis get on with it themselves and pull out, as the country itself is no real threat and in reality never was. This whole mess in both Afghanistan followed by Iraq was an ill thought out US adventure that despite Bush's attempts to suck everyone else in, only Blair with his Monty Pythonese 'quest for the holy legacy' was conned into it.

Mike, Denia, Spain

The NATO made a geste of solidarity with the USA by sending some troops to the far away Afghanistan. But then we were very disappointed when that USA, the main involved party, backed off and choose to focus on the unrelated Iraq adventure. So, when they ask for a greater effort, we ask questions. After all, we do not share the shoot first, think later tactics of the USA and its closest ally, two countries that haven't had foreign troops on their soil for centuries. We ask ourselves questions before we act, like there are:
Are the people we sought still there? No, they're not.
Can we to secure Afghanistan? Not without a strong government. But a government needs a country.
Is Afghanistan a country, or just an area? An area, I'd say, and the americans destroying the communications there didn't help.
So then, what can we reallistically expect to accomplish in Afghanistan, and is the cost bearable? History learns that this probably isn't the case, and we choose to avoid the risk of loosing.

Dirk Bosmans, Kruibeke, Belgium

Regarding EU "help" in Afghanistan: It is times like this that you know who your friends really are. However, don't be too angry at the French/Germans/Spanish. That anger is exactly like anger at a paralytic who cannot take himself to the toilet.

The comfortable Continentals' moral paralysis is more a cause for pity. Having repaired the last war's bullet holes, they forget that the world has been and remains a dangerous place. But why bother with future dangers, when you have more important things to do - like railing against other's failings.

Aren't you glad that you didn't dump the pound for the Euro?

Robert A. Jones, Nashville, Tennessee, USA

International institutions don't die, they only fade away - as the League of nations did in the 1930s.

After Afghanistan, NATO will do the same. The US and its traditional allies - and new ones like Poland - will no longer bother to accommodate a gaggle of fractious "allies" who clog up logistics, demand to be consulted, and won't (and usually can't) fight. Not to mention compromising security as the French did in the former Yugoslavia.

Commenter Tim accurately satirizes the views of this useless bunch - they seriously believe they can set an initial plan for a war and stick to it regardless of the facts on the ground! Of course wars never go to plan.

Commenter Andy could have answered his own question easily using Wikipedia. The Soviets entered Afghanistan with 5 divisions - about 100,000 men, and by the time they'd pulled out this had risen to an estimated 115,000. That's nothing like the current war.

Jeremy Thomas, London,

Let us pull out completely from places like Bosnia and leave the cowardly EU to it's own devices. Surely the protection of our own forces in Afghanistan is more important.

Lenny Harper, Ayr, UK

It's not ridiculous to consider pulling out of the EU. Time and time again we see examples of Britain supporting the EU and abiding by the various rules and regulations, only to see that Germany and France, in particular, opt out and do what is best for their respective countries.
We are not in a family of nations, nor are we well regarded in the EU.
Let's pull out and look after our own affairs so that we can put the considerable savings to use as we see fit and enhance the quality of life for our own citizens.

trevorjd, Torbay, Devon

Has anybody plotted over time the number of troops the USSR had in Afghanistan ? I imagine their leaders started with the idea that a small number of troops could pacify the Afghans and the number steadily grew as they discovered otherwise. It would be interesting to understand where the UK & USA are in the perhaps the same process. Or to put it another way the only thing you can learn from history is that people don't learn from history.

Andy, Bristol, UK

Although it's rather ridiculous to suggest we pull out of the EU over this (we'd still be part of NATO and have the same problem), it is awful some other European countries aren't pulling their weight.

However this will come to bite them in the behind in the future, as it will military co-operation in Europe more difficult. I don't see a British PM sending thousands of troops off with the "European Rapid Reaction Force" if he thinks they'll have to do all the real fighting. Indeed, if Germany or anyone else wants reinforcements to the Balkans or another place they see as important, we should ignore them.

Francis, Bristol,

Times does not care to mention the 1000 troops Polish detachment that is about to be dispatched to fight Talibans. Less than the British, but given the lack of experience and money and equipment, something is better than nothing..

Wojtek, Warsaw, Poland

Other European NATO countries are sensibly sticking to their initial plans rather than allowing themselves to fall into the trap of 'mission creep' as we have done.

Tim, Lancaster,

It is outrageous that these countries that backed the original military action in Afghanistan and are part of Nato are now running away. Fair enough, Iraq is not their mess to deal with, however it cannot be used as an excuse to leave Afghanistan to the British, the US and a few gallant, less powerful, yet loyal, allies such as the Estonians, to shore up this vital state in the international struggle against Islamic extremism.

Alex, London,

First Britain should the seriously about getting out of the EU,
and secondly instead of rolling over to Germany and France they
should be giving an ultimatum that unless they provide more troops
and remove the restrictions they have on the trops there then Britain
should just pull out. Of course they won't.

Barry Holmes, Christchurch, NZ

England must know America’s great gratitude. And our absolute commitment to send fleet, after fleet, after fleet, to defend the Island if ever you need.

Pat, Chicago, USA

Why is the British army deployed to prop up an unpopular Amercan puppet? If the Afghan government really had popular support, it would be able to raise an army to maintain itself in power.

Ernst, Alton, Hants