If you look far back enough on my posts, you’ll find that I was giving Bush the benefit of the doubt on the Iraq situation, based on the fact that he was President and was certainly privy to information that we, the public, did not possess. As it turned out, he had made all that shit up. So by 2008, Bush had squandered any credibility that his strategies were based on information gathered from the field. So, yes, I think a member of the Senate Foreign Relations committee could have been sufficiently in the loop to form a competitive strategy regarding Afghanistan, certainly in the large details.
All of this arguing, however, is your attempt obfuscate the fact that Romney said he would that he would schedule his Afghanistan policy based on the input of commanders on the ground, and then critiqued Obama for doing precisely that.
*My point is that I do not believe that Romney’s critiques regarding Obama are based on policy or an intelligent assessment of the situation on the ground – it’s a completely reflexive thrashing of any policy that Obama puts forward, regardless of its merit. *