First it was Main Street. Then it was Joe Six-Pack. And last night, Joe the Plumber took center stage. After three presidential debates between Senators McCain and Obama, our nation’s veterans can’t help but be left wondering: What about us?

Beyond the fact that there was no real talk (straight or otherwise) at all about the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, foreign policy or military affairs, Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are facing unbelievable challenges when they come home. More than 300,000 new veterans are suffering from a serious psychological injury, and less than half are receiving the care they need. Tens of thousands of troops have suffered disabling physical injuries, new veterans are also facing high rates of unemployment, and almost two thousand brave men and women who served in Iraq or Afghanistan have already wound up homeless. And all the economic issues hitting the average American are hitting our military folks even harder. Millions are wrestling with the mortgage crisis, rising food costs, and the high price of gas. Now imagine dealing with all that while being deployed to a war zone for 12 months for the third time in five years. This is what our servicemembers are facing.

But not once during the presidential debates did we hear any substance from the candidates about how they plan to support our veterans.

We’ve been bombarded with talking point after talking point on the economy, healthcare, and energy. Joe the Plumber even had his name repeated more than a dozen times last night. But Jim and Jane the Veteran have been left behind.

1. Ensure Thorough, Professional, and Confidential Mental Health Screening
2. Advance-Fund VA Health Care
3. Overhaul the Military and Veterans' Disability System
4. Cut the Claims Backlog in Half
5. End the Passive VA System
6. Combat the Shortage of Mental Health Professionals
7. Create Tax Incentives for Patriotic Employers
8. Fight Homelessness among Veterans
9. Give Families Access to Mental Health Support
10. Repeal the Waiver of High-Deployment Pay

LONDON, Oct 20 (Reuters) - NATO members are wavering in their political commitment to Afghanistan, one of the alliance's top commanders said on Monday, describing the nearly seven-year-old campaign against the Taliban as disjointed.

Pointing to more than 70 "caveats" that gave individual countries a veto over certain operations, and the fact that troop commitments remained unfulfilled, General John Craddock said he was fearful the operation was being short-changed.

"We are demonstrating a political will that is in my judgment sometimes wavering," Craddock, a U.S. general and NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Europe, said in a speech to policymakers and defence analysts in London.

"It's this wavering political will that impedes operational progress and brings into question the relevance of the alliance here in the 21st century," he said.

NATO troops serve in Afghanistan under a United Nations mandate. That mandate initially limited their operations to Kabul but in 2003 was expanded to give NATO a wider role to support the Afghan government throughout the country.

As insecurity has increased in Afghanistan, NATO troops have steadily been drawn into more deadly operations, a factor that has dissuaded some countries from deeper involvement.

Craddock told Britain's Sky News television more British troops would be needed in Afghanistan's Helmand province but the precise number had yet to be decided.

"That will be up to the commander on the ground but the situation in Helmand province I think is critical," he said. "That's the key area for the production of poppy, it is a key area for the insurgency."

Insecurity has led farmers to switch from producing food to opium, a crop that also funds the Taliban insurgency. Helmand produced about half the world's opium last year.