HorizonForumsone horizon
Log inSign up

[ms] · Est. May 2002

Music madethis place,we just kept itgoing...

One durable person. One social graph. Many communities—and every way people speak, share, listen, write, gather and remember.

Forums / Politics

War on Terror No More

6 durable postsStarted 2005-07-27Latest 2005-07-28
#17297Post 1 of 6

Evidently, the verbiage is being changed now to more accurately reflect the nature of the conflict to "a global struggle against violent extremism." Check it out:

[url]http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/26/politics/26strategy.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1122480584-2oZaRn23qdGIWcCtu0PQvw[/url]

Of note: [quote][b] U.S. Officials Retool Slogan for Terror War[/b]

By ERIC SCHMITT and THOM SHANKER Published: July 26, 2005

WASHINGTON, July 25 - The Bush administration is retooling its slogan for the fight against Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups, pushing the idea that the long-term struggle is as much an ideological battle as a military mission, senior administration and military officials said Monday.

In recent speeches and news conferences, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and the nation's senior military officer have spoken of "a global struggle against violent extremism" rather than "the global war on terror," which had been the catchphrase of choice. Administration officials say that phrase may have outlived its usefulness, because it focused attention solely, and incorrectly, on the military campaign.

Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the National Press Club on Monday that he had "objected to the use of the term 'war on terrorism' before, because if you call it a war, then you think of people in uniform as being the solution." He said the threat instead should be defined as violent extremists, with the recognition that "terror is the method they use."

Although the military is heavily engaged in the mission now, he said, [b]future efforts require "all instruments of our national power, all instruments of the international communities' national power." The solution is "more diplomatic, more economic, more political than it is military," [/b]he concluded.[/quote]

No shit. Good thing we've ostracized (sp?) ourselves from most of our allies, huh?

:roll:

#453730Post 2 of 6

Seems like changing it now would downplay their accomplishments. "War on terror" makes it seem like it is winnable. Changing it to "struggle" makes it seem as it could possibly go on forever. Though it should have been named it in the first place changing it now, to me, is a mistake.

#453734Post 3 of 6

^^you're probably right. changing it now does kinda make us appear weak. I wish Bush and his pals would spend as much time concentrating on actually winning the "war," "struggle," or whatever it is as they do on coming up with new ways to spin it...

#453737Post 4 of 6

Get these fuckers out of office.

#453760Post 5 of 6

Re: War on Terror No More

Has no one noticed that the word struggle translates to Jihad?

These PNAC'ers want eternal war/struggle. It is essential to their staying in power.

Another angle might be that being involved in a struggle rather than a war, may release the Bush administration from War Crimes culpability.

#453915Post 6 of 6

Re: War on Terror No More

The Daily show was talking about this last night. I agree that the Struggle sounds more long term than war. My thinking is that if we were having success in this struggle or war then there wouldn't be a need for a name change.

Log in to reply