Now, White House officials seem to be ruling out sending more troops until the Afghan presidential election has been resolved.
A point emphasised by the White House spokesperson Robert Gibbs on Monday:
"All troops in the world will not solve a problem without a partner that is there ultimately to help. It's not just a military problem - there's a civilian and economic development side to this."
The US state department also denied that a potential presidential election run-off would backfire on the Obama administration by slowing its troop level decision-making process.
Spokesperson Ian Kelly told Al Jazeera:
“We need to support this process that's occurring now and this process is being carried out according to Afghan law and the Afghan constitution."
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also linked future US policy in Afghanistan to a credible election outcome in Kabul. She told reporters:
"I am very hopeful that we will see a resolution in line with the constitutional order in the next several days."
So the US administration is quite clearly on the same page regarding Afghanistan - "wait until the election is sorted out" - but analysts say that there are dangers lurking if it all takes too long.
Obama supporters called it prudent thinking, but critics are likely to use it to amplify their argument that the president is dithering while US troops are in danger in Afghanistan.
Content on this website is for general information purposes only. Your comments are provided by your own free will and you take sole responsibility for any direct or indirect liability. You hereby provide us with an irrevocable, unlimited, and global license for no consideration to use, reuse, delete or publish comments, in accordance with Community Rules & Guidelines and Terms and Conditions.