20,000, 30,000, or 40,000 troops - to "win" in Afghanistan? The prognosis is devastating. According to General Davis Petraeus: "This is the kind of fight we're in for the rest of our lives, and probably our kid's lives." Why fight a war that even the general in charge says can't be won? Whom will it benefit? What will the perpetuation of this conflict cost? Does the ostensibly most powerful nation in the world have no choice but to wage permanent war? Are there no alternatives? President Obama has repeatedly stated that in July 2011 a withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan will commence. Will the "withdrawal" be symbolic, or are we looking at another case of our president's broken promises? Jeff Rense, in his huge web site, had the answer a long, long time ago, when he persuaded his illustrator to comment on Obama's abuse of his receipt of the Nobel Peace Prize, essentially violating the intention of it's founder, who wanted to atone for his development of dangerous explosives: "Nobel Peace Prize with oil change". Surely Nobel is even now turning over in his grave!