A Small War in Afghanistan

X
Story Stream
recent articles

Nir Rosen's lengthy article on the Taliban in Rolling Stone has generated some controversy. To quickly recap, Rosen embedded himself with the Taliban to provide a behind the scenes look at their insurgency against U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

This prompted an interesting reaction from several contributors to the Small Wars Journal, including Dave Dilegge who wrote:

If there was ever a grouping of individuals and supporters that deserved complete annihilation (yea - I said the A word) – the Taliban and their support structure would and should be up front and center. It will take quite some time (that is why it is called The Long War) and there will most certainly be peaks and valleys along the way – but we must - and will - win this one and we will write the last chapter of the history book reserved for the victors.

This was followed by Bing West, also at Small Wars:

"I am a guest of the Taliban." Rosen wrote. Supposing in 1944 he had written, “I am a guest of the Waffen SS.” It is doubtful if Rolling Stone would have published Rosen’s article during World War II. The norms and values of American society have changed enormously in the past half-century.

I don't have much to say on the question of Rosen's journalistic ethics, but I do think it's curious that writers for a journal that bills itself as devoted to "small" wars would retreat to World War II for their historical comparisons.

To defeat the Waffen SS and the entire Nazi regime, the Allies killed several million Germans and laid waste to the country's urban and industrial centers. Our air force blanketed German cities with bombs and incendiary devices. Civilians were included in the carnage in an effort to break the will of the German people.

Is this what the folks at Small Wars (!) envision for Pakistan (which is, after all, the "support structure") and the Pashtun population on either side of the Durand Line?

It's easy to talk about "annihilation" and make strident calls for "moral clarity" without owning up to the implications of your own rhetoric.

Comment
Show commentsHide Comments

Related Articles