For those of you interested in the debate over how we should be fighting in Afghanistan I give you three links. The first link is from the Afghan Study Group who’s report on Afghanistan and their version of a way forward.
Afghan study group report This was the conclusion
The United States should by no means abandon Afghanistan, but it is time to abandon the current strategy that is not working. Trying to pacify Afghanistan by force of arms will not work. A costly military campaign there is more likely to jeopardize America’s vital security interests than to protect them. The Study Group believes that the United States should pursue more modest goals that are both consistent with America’s true interests and far more likely to succeed.
The second link is a critique of the Afghan study groups report by Joshua Foust. Here is a just a bit.
The ignorance underlying the ASG report goes further still: because no one on their panel has studied Afghanistan in any detail, they are unaware of ongoing and failed efforts to resolve the conflict in non-military ways. This is a critical failure on their part, as the centerpiece of their argument is that we must adopt a “radically new approach” to the war. Most of their recommendations, however, are already on-going, and several of them are completely unworkable.
The third is Herschel Smith at Captains Journal and his thoughts on this subject. Here is a bit from Herschel.
Logical contradictions are death to an argument, and this report is chock full of them. Consistency is not the hobgoblin of small minds. It is the stuff of life. Logical inconsistencies are to me a complete turnoff. I close my mind quickly to someone who can’t maintain logical attention to detail.
What I find most enlightening are the comments on all the sites. Joshua’s in particular.
If Afghanistan interests you these three postings are a good look at the differences in opinion and strategies. They are not in depth answers but pose many good questions.
Jb's Sanctuary 
It’s like the difference between a coffee shop intellectual and a somebody who lives in the real world. I’ll let you decide which is which, though I think you know.
I want to know why we are not getting any closer to killing Bin Laden…
We don’t have enough technology to get the job done?
11th
11thacr Says, why ask rhetorical questions that you know the answer to?
OBL is an international phenomenon. He is backed by powerful parts of the establishment of some specific nation states. Again, you already know which ones. 😉
Since he lives in a country adjacent to Afghanistan, he enjoys a type of safe haven and protection.
Assumption: Osama is alive:
11th, we have the technology what we lack is the will, not on the part of those in the field but the nation and both administrations. Fear of war promotes continual war.