Comparing The Forever War Fallacy And The War On Terror

Imagine standing in an airport watching everyone around you running in chaos, looking for a way out. This is one of the many results of Biden's withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan. In the articles "The 'Forever War' Fallacy" by Noah Rothman, and "The War on Terror: 20 Years of Bloodshed and Delusion" by Tariq Ali the authors present their opposing opinions on the war on terror and the withdrawal of the U.S. troops and the implications. Rothman explains how they supported the withdrawal, explaining how it was necessary. On the other hand, Ali believes that the withdrawal was a failure, leading to an increase in violence and causing chaos. Both authors manage to utilize logos by providing information about past events that can take part

What is the difference between a '' and a ''? By having the perspective of someone personally affected in the article, we can humanize the actions taken. Using words like “fled” and “refuge” can give a more human aspect, making people feel more sympathy. Looking deeper into the article, there are many different logical fallacies the reader may be able to pick out. In “The ‘Forever War’ Fallacy”, Rothman uses a slippery slope by implying that the withdrawal will only lead to a worse state and not considering how the outcome may be positive in the long run. Along with this, the article also presents a hasty generalization. This can be shown when Rothman states, "Withdrawal has not ushered in a new era of revitalized American leadership. Just the opposite of that. It has delivered an abject humiliation for the United States." 2. What is the difference between a '' and a ''? By using words like abject and humiliation, Rothman suggests that every bit of the outcome is negative. Rothman believes that all of the long-term outcomes of the withdrawal are going to be negative, just because the short-term ones

Another significant part of the articles are the covers. Comparing the two articles, you notice how one is more abstract than the other. Looking at the cover of Rothman’s article, the repetition of the words can have a significant impact. By showing what is most likely Afghan citizens, the reader may feel the emotional impact of the war, seeing the innocent people who are being put in danger because of this conflict. Moving to the cover of Ali’s article, it contains words like “war”, “killed”, “wasted”, and “plague” displayed over what appears to be a microscopic drop of blood. Using words like this can create a dreadful and painful tone for the article without even reading it, producing a feeling of distress to the reader. Along with this, having the words over a microscopic drop of blood can help the reader sense the danger being discussed in the article. Between the two, Rothman manages to make his cover more abstract and rely on the reader to interpret their own opinions on the cover while Ali manages to convey pathos through his cover, making his readers feel a certain way with his word