There are HUGE differences in the approach taken to this sort of mission by Special Forces as opposed to the regular Army way. That is exactly why S.F. EXISTS! To be able to go into an area in small teams composed of very competent and mature individuals, EARN the trust of the people there, and develop good intelligence and possibly train and arm some paramilitary forces.
The "overwhelming force", kick-in-the-door, "grab-em-by-the-nuts and their hearts and minds will follow" approach is appropriate in some situations- probably not in this one.
This mistrust of unconventional forces has a long history in the U.S. Army, and it is not going away anytime soon. What we will need is better senior leadership, so that each element is used when and where it is needed, and people are not put on the ground just to get their "combat patch" tickets punched.
Who knows what the absolute truth is. The article is clearly biased for the Special Forces and against the 82nd. Afghanistan has become a classic guerrilla conflict: a largely invisible enemy vs. a very visible army overlayed on an indifferent population. How do you win a guerrilla war like this?
I think there is some truth in this article, but I don't believe most of what is being floated by the media at this stage.