Magazine October 4, 2021, Issue

Letters

U.S. Army soldiers with 1st Platoon, 2nd Battalion, 508th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 82nd Airborne Division, patrol in Mazraeh village, Kandahar Province, Afghanistan in 2010. (Yannis Behrakis/Reuters)

Forever Wars Disagreement
Noah Rothman’s contention (“The ‘Forever War’ Fallacy,” September 13) that the U.S. military footprint in Afghanistan was a “low-cost, high-reward” deployment couldn’t be further from the truth. The cost certainly wasn’t low for the tens of thousands of Afghans who were killed during the war. And it most certainly wasn’t low for U.S. troops either, over 2,440 of whom made the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of an Afghan government that was woefully inadequate to the task of surviving (let alone governing).

Could the U.S. have retained a presence on the ground? Theoretically, yes. But for what purpose – and

To Read the Full Story

Something to Consider

If you valued reading this article, please consider joining our fight by donating to our Fall Webathon. Your contribution makes it possible for us to continue our mission of speaking truth and defending conservative principles.

If you valued reading this article, please consider joining our fight by donating to our Fall Webathon.

 

Support Our Mission
NR Editors includes members of the editorial staff of the National Review magazine and website.

In This Issue

Special Issue on Crime

Books, Arts & Manners

Sections

Letters

Letters

A response to the notion that the U.S. military footprint in Afghanistan was a low-cost, high-reward deployment.

Recommended

The Latest

Defending Dave Chappelle

Defending Dave Chappelle

By standing up to the woke mob, Netflix is providing a model for how corporations should respond to demands that they enforce leftist speech codes.