Commentary pieces in two outlets argue that the United States’ post‑9/11 “war on terror” approach has not solved the problems it targeted and instead has led to prolonged conflict and broad harm. Both sources frame 9/11 as a turning point that enabled long-running military campaigns described as damaging to countries affected and, in some accounts, to Americans as well.
The Asia Times article emphasizes that the response has evolved over 25 years, asserting that the campaign has widened in scope and impact, and it points to links it makes between the wars and later developments in the region and global politics. Naked Capitalism likewise characterizes the wars as a pretext for extended warmaking, focusing on the consequences and casting doubt on the original justification.
While both accounts share the central claim that war has not been an appropriate or effective response, they differ in emphasis: one leans toward a broader geopolitical narrative, while the other concentrates on the long-term damage resulting from the post‑9/11 strategy. Neither source presents new reporting; both are reflective assessments of the policy record.
