The following quote is from an article that appears in the Aug. 9, 2010, print and iPad editions of TIME magazine.
"The Taliban pounded on the door just before midnight, demanding that Aisha, 18, be punished for running away from her husband's house. Her in-laws treated her like a slave, Aisha pleaded. They beat her. If she hadn't run away, she would have died. Her judge, a local Taliban commander, was unmoved. Aisha's brother-in-law held her down while her husband pulled out a knife. First he sliced off her ears. Then he started on her nose."
Does this cover photo put an end to the debate over whether we should continue the war in Afghanistan?
Will Obama's increased dependence on Predator drones and the, so called "targeted killing" improve the lives of Afghan women?
A blogger going by the name "Sara" points out in What Happens Even When We’re In Afghanistan,
"The implication that the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan would lead to more cases like Aisha’s, or that it is exclusively the U.S. military presence in the country that prevents these egregious human rights abuses, is specious at best (especially because Aisha’s “punishment” was meted out last year, while significant strides were being made for Afghan women–not prior to U.S. involvement in 2001). So not even our presence in the bruised nation entirely prevented the violence that the cover suggests would continue if we withdrew."
In the New York Times article referenced to above, it's noted that,
"..........the lack of apparent progress in the nearly nine-year war is making it harder for Mr. Obama to hold his own party together on the issue."
Can there be any doubt that Time is using the cover of the magazine to keep those disgruntled Democrats in line? The essence of the Democrat Liberal mindset is emotion. The propaganda machine at the magazine is predicting the emotional response to this horrible image of a disfigured, Afghan teen aged girl will persuade many Progressives to get with their President on this.