So what's your argument then? Is it that Europe is too weak to do anything or too cowardly to do anything?
My guess is it's the latter, as they've got 3/5 of the veto seats at the UNSC.
The US's fight in Afghanistan is completely different than the USSR's fight in Afghanistan, on many levels. Or, you can just look at it simplistically to suit your argument--your choice.
Just make up your mind when it comes to the UN/international involvement/consensus, please. Either get on board with it or GTFO. When it's convenient, you say the US acts unilaterally, even though it's enforcing UN resolutions (with several other nations along for the ride). When it's convenient, you say the US should act unilaterally because the UN is ineffectual. When it's convenient, you say the US does this or that, ignoring the dozens of other countries and UN resolutions backing it up, saying that because the US is supplying the bulk of the forces, that it's really just the US doing what it wants. Guess what? You can't have it both ways. Allied Force (Balkans) was predominantly US forces. Either give us all the credit (you shouldn't, but using your logic, you should), or apply the same math to every other multinational effort out there (Afghanistan comes immediately to mind). Korea: UN effort...still a UN effort. Vietnam: UN effort...just ask the Aussies. Gulf War 1: UN effort. Afghanistan: Multinational effort with UN support. The only pseudo-outlier is Iraq, and that argument can go on ad nauseum (and has).
So again: either be consistent or admit to your hypocrisy. Either way, it's fine with me.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular