Want to make clear I post that only as a counterpoint, and I think both are extremely qualified to hear out.

I have a lot of respect for Rohde, having followed his reporting for many years. He is no warmonger nor is he a dilettante on this front. Like Lynch, he is not a political hack nor is he an ideologue.

Here's the Amazon blurb for his April 2013 book Beyond War: Reimagining American Influence in a New Middle East:

This book distills eleven years of expert reporting for The New York Times, Reuters, and The Atlantic Monthly into a clarion call for change. An incisive look at the evolving nature of war, Rohde exposes how a dysfunctional Washington squandered billions on contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan, neglected its true allies in the war on terror and failed to employ its most potent nonmilitary weapons: American consumerism, technology, and investment. Rohde then surveys post-Arab Spring Tunisia, Turkey, and Egypt, and finds a yearning for American technology, trade, and education. He argues that only Muslim moderates, not Americans, can eradicate militancy. For readers of Steve Coll, Tom Ricks, and Ahmed Rashid, Beyond War shows how the failed American effort to back moderate Muslims since 9/11 can be salvaged.

Add to this that he was the victim of an 8-month-long kidnapping by the Talilban, that he does not fear the possible serious blowback of arming those rebels is something to really consider. He is surely taking into account hat there are so many Sunni jihadis from all over in their midst, but still feels it is the best option.

P.S. Over at The Atlantic, in the last week he published two pieces on the security state, and did an interesting piece May 17 on how Obama has contributed to his own "aura of scandal" by being "aloof and disengaged."