Tuesday, March 24, 2009



"War on terror": The new version

The announcement below was from over a month back and we will see in a monent what has become of it:
"In another effort to undo the legacy of George W. Bush's presidency, the Obama administration is searching for alternatives to the term "war on terror."

In recent days, Obama's national-security officials have had brainstorming sessions to come up with different ways to describe the U.S. government's efforts to defeat Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan, according to administration sources who asked not to be identified talking about private discussions.

What's being sought is a more precise phrase that can recast the U.S. government's counterterrorism fight in ideological as well as military terms. Obama publicly signaled the new approach this week. When asked about the "war on terror" phrase by CNN's Anderson Cooper, Obama said, "Well you know, I think it is very important for us to recognize that we have a battle or a war against some terrorist organizations . Words matter in this situation because one of the ways we're going to win this struggle is through the battle of hearts and minds."

Source

So what is the WOT now called? Apparently it is a “novel type of armed conflict against armed groups". See here. I always thought "war on terror" was pretty wishy washy but the Obama version really beats the band.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Just like the Ministry of Love concerns itself with torture and the Ministry of Truth with lies and the Ministry of Plenty with scarcity.

I'm sure we're going to win the battle of the hearts and minds by changing a few words.

Anonymous said...

What is wrong the "War on Terror" since it refers to the war with terrorists? Seems specific and accurate enough. Oh yeah, I forgot, Bush thought of it, thats why we can't use that phrase.

Anonymous said...

What is wrong the "War on Terror" since it refers to the war with terrorists? Seems specific and accurate enough. Oh yeah, I forgot, Bush thought of it, thats why we can't use that phrase.

Anonymous said...

Hello Good Gentles All!

Things are much worse than you think:

Attorney General Eric Holder revealed this unsettling news when speaking to reporters last week, saying that the remaining 240 terrorists at Gitmo — including several suspected of plotting the 9/11 attacks — will have their cases reviewed one by one. Some of the terrorists will be put on trial in the U.S. court system, just like any other run of the mill criminal, but others could simply be released. Holder explained that, "For those who are in that second category, who can be released, there are a variety of options we have. Among them is the possibility that we could release them into this country."

FOX News web site.

Previously, these bloody murderers were shooting at our boys overseas in foreign lands. Soon they will be shooting at our wives and children in our own country.

The primary responsibility of any government is to secure the lives and liberty of the people.

The day the first American is hurt or killed by one of these deliberately government released terrorists on our own soil the US government will cease to be the legitimate government of the people. We will no longer be morally bound to that government because it has broken its bond with us by refusing to honor its most sovereign obligation - to protect our lives.

Pax,

InFides

Dirk said...

It seems anything to continue to discredit the Bush administration. But, this administration has to keep it up, so when things go sour the Democrat majority will have someone to blame instead of taking responsibility themselves.

Dirk
THE FIRST AMENDMENT NOT POLITICALLY CORRECT II
http://tsalagiman2.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...

Here's a clue,

"In my speech, although I did not use the word "terrorism," I referred to "man-caused" disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur." –

Janet Nopolitano, Head Dyke At DHS

Anonymous said...

The Bush administration chose "War On Terror" in order to bring on -board the international community (you know, those people he was always accused of ignoring) by not crafting a term which would refer only to the US goals and safety but would include any other terrorism in the world.

And now O'Bummer who's supposed to herald a new age of international cooperation is going to narrow it down to just our goals and safety.

It seems a principle of the left is to point and magnify a flaw in leadership they oppose and yet when they (unfortunately) get that position for themselves they have the same flaw but much more pronounced.

Anonymous said...

Prediction: The Obungo administration will slowly and quietly disolve our war on terrorism. In his mind, or actually the minds of the people who run him, that money is needed for all of his leftist social engineering programs. In fact, if you're paying attention, it has already started.

Anonymous said...

Here's another clue;

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/03/25/report-obama-administration-backing-away-global-war-terror/

Anonymous said...

So let's call it The War against Predatory Islamic Aggressors. That says it all clearly and truthfully enough.