Bragging and saying I've interacted with the locals are two different things, anyone who brags is either lying about what they saw or have never served.
I know full well how it works, your saying we need to be there killing people while I say we should be dealing with issues here at home and remove ourselves from the situation.
Conducting a war on terror is exactly the same thing as a war on drugs, a never ending scenario that only compounds the problem creating an even greater divide than the one that already exists.
One side is a mature, and economically viable route the other is the exact opposite. On one side we have an endgame with conclusion and the other a never ending war in which there are no winnable scenarios.
What I am saying is that the problems we face (some of which are own making) are highly complex and that there are several issues involved. I'll assume you are who you say so this will make it easier. As you have seen this is a no win scenario. The initial military action was well executed and we assumed control of key areas. We should have done maximum damage to the enemy and got out. We should have realized that we weren't going to make Little Americans out of people, especially in Afghanistan, which you realize from being there doesn't have a Western notion of a federalist government. Have you heard anyone say "the President of Kabul"? That's a jab at Karzai and you probably know that too. There isn't a cohesive people as a nation and I don't remember there ever having been one. So right there applying social engineering is a given failure.
So the powers that be had no clue going in. Then they send precious resources on some crazy war with Iraq which doens't make your job any easier. Clueless political leadership- we've seen that before.
OK so it sucks. We shouldn't be in the position we are. We are. That means that we deal with what we have.
"Winning hearts and minds" isn't going to happen and it never was. Still there are significant threats which aren't going to be discussed in the open. We see the results and they aren't pretty, but you ought to have some idea how intelligence functions. They aren't going to come out and give specifics which could compromise their operations. If there was an attack it's because the various factors were weighed and almost certainly information was provided by people who would suffer and you know what "suffer" means. You don't put your operatives in peril from both a moral and professional obligation perspective. Does that mean I'm happy with the consequences? Hardly. I do know that the CIA and other agencies which were gutted by ideologues in the Bush days have regained a substantial portion of their functionality, but they still aren't going to tell you or I what the hell is going on.
One could argue that no threat regardless of the magnitude warrants any action and that we must entirely withdraw to our own borders and hope "the bad men" don't take over, but I'd argue that the first is foolish and the second someone elses mental instability. I don't like either, thanks.
There are real threats going on in real time. That does not mean we should be indiscriminate nor ignore the many factors which all play together.
This campaign was a cluster that we were handed and we have to choose among all evil options, but we have to choose. Do we no nothing if there is a high confidence that there is a serious and substantial threat? If the answer is no then we just withdraw and accept the consequences whatever they may be. If yes then you know talking someone out of this isn't going to happen. Sending teams in to take out selected targets is so problematic that it's not done except in rare cases. We learned that decades ago.
None of this implies or suggests abandoning long term efforts by other means. I've seen enough to know I don't want perpetual conflict and if there's a peaceful way to settle it I'm all for it. That however does not address what may be happening this instant.
Hopefully this gives a better idea of my perspective, and again if you have constructive suggestions I'd love to hear them.