When our President, George Bush, says those words, he is talking non-sense. So is anyone else using these words. The words are inflammatory, and their ultimate effect often deliberately to cause people to suspend any rational judgment about the things the speaker wants to do because of this so-called War on Terror. When rational judgment is suspended, people will do anything no matter how ineffective it is because of the emotional mind-clouding power, and the fear it gives rise to, when such meaningless words are used.

It is also extremely sloppy journalism to repeat this phase, except as a direct quote, because it is meaningless. It is as meaningless as war on laziness or the war on weather. Journalists seem never to have heard of semantics, or an abstraction ladder, a key concept in semantics (well worth looking at), both of which deal with the meaning of words and how their use affects us.

Right now, we as a country are involved in a number of situations, some dangerous, some not, one or two very separate wars, some diplomatic efforts, and a very diverse set of circumstances that may possibly threaten our way of life, and we, as a country, appear to be afraid of a number of diversified groups of people who reside in various countries. We are also, as a country, possibly threatened in a number of ways by a number of countries, as opposed to small scattered groups of people. All of these have been lumped together into a catch phrase that is entirely meaningless, namely a “war on terror.”

If we can define what these groups and countries are and distinguish how they differ from one another, it can help us to understand what were doing, why were doing it, and what the characteristics of all this mixed up war on terror might really mean. This, of course, immediately implies that there is no one single opponent against whom we can wage war, but instead presents a variety of different situations, some more dangerous than others, each of them requiring that we handle them, as best we can, in different ways if we want to reduce any threat they pose.

(I)The first group of people that we claim to be fighting with is a vaguely defined group, once led by a man named Bin Laden, that calls itself Al Qaeda. It appears to be based in Afghanistan, but may have spread to various other countries. It is a loosely-knit, guerrilla group that dislikes the West, vaguely defined as European and American countries. We dont know nearly enough about it to be at war with this group because it is so diffuse, and it is all too easy to confuse it with other groups at times. It is not certain that its leaders are alive or have control over this group because it is so diffuse. Originally, it was most probably responsible for the event known as 9/11. We, as a country under President Bush, claim to be fighting this group but appear to have lost interest in pursuing this group forcefully.

The number of deaths of U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan in this first military operation is 255 with 765 injured as of January 2006, as tracked by Wikipedia. I cite this figure in sharp contrast to the number of U.S. troops killed in the next military effort, still going on today, in Iraq which was 2,299 U.S. soldiers killed and 33,094 seriously injured as of March 2006 (cited at the site http://icasualties.org/oif/def…..fault.aspx). The disparity between Afghanistan and Iraq, in terms of dead and casualties is very revealing about what is being emphasized.

(II)The second group that we were fighting was the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq. It was a war declared by President Bush, with no real resistance from Congress. The enemy was a vague one mainly the dictator, Saddam Hussein, who somehow had Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) and was linked vaguely to terrorists, the same ones named in Afghanistan as being Al Qaeda. None of these reasons has proven to be true. I repeat: None of the reasons given for this war have been proven to be true. As cited above, more than 2,000 U.S. soldiers have been killed in Iraq as a result of this war. Because of what the President and his Administration have been saying, and repeating as a mantra, according to many surveys, many people in the U.S. believe, irrationally, that this war is being fought as a war on terror. This is simply not an accurate or true statement.

Our troops really arent fighting terror or terrorists here. They are actually intervening in an internal conflict that has been going on for a long time back to when England and Winston Churchill was involved. I will add that there have been instances of non-Iraqi individuals crossing the border into Iraq from Syria and Iran to attack American military forces, and some of these individuals may be linked to Al Qaeda, but that is not the biggest part of the problem. In fact, because of our invasion of Iraq and our destruction of the status quo, by eliminating Saddam Hussein, it may be that we have opened a whole new breeding ground for, and encouraged, these individuals to learn how to operate successfully and conduct terrorist operations. Iraq thus appears to be involved in a civil war of Sunnis versus Shiites, with Kurds protecting their interests, and some outsiders conducting guerilla terrorist operations aimed at fomenting unrest and driving the U.S. forces out. We cannot be involved in a war on terror here because there are at least four separate parties here, and it isnt always clear who is doing what to hurt or kill whom.

(III)A third arena whom we are not fighting is North Korea, a dictatorship that is working to build an atomic bomb capability. This country is a military threat to South Korea because it possesses a huge standing army of more than a million soldiers. It is a country with a well-defined government, not a loosely organized group of individuals. We have not declared war on them, nor have they declared war on the U.S. But for some reason, at times, they have been included in this war on terror.

(IV)A fourth arena that is also sometimes referred to under the mantra of war on terror is Iran. Iran is the largest country in the Middle East, with a government that is primarily run by its religious right. They may provide a place for Al Qaeda and other groups which dislike the U.S. for various reasons to develop and train members. We are not at war with Iran, and they are not at war with us. But, for some reason, they also have been lumped into this war on terror.

(V)There are other places in the world, such as South America and the Philippines, that have been also lumped into this war on terror, but, again, we have not declared war on them nor have they declared war on the U.S. Numerous groups, some of which hate the U.S. and some involved in insurgencies against their existing government, have the earmarks of terrorists in that they conduct underground operations, kill people indiscriminately, have loose organizations, may or may not be linked to other similar organizations.

It is very important, unlike our President and his “war on terror”, to separate different types of terrorists (a very maligned word) into specific and different groups. So we are not at war with all of the groups Ive mentioned. We couldnt be. Many of them have no government for us to declare war on. It is sloppy use of communication to say that we are engaged in a war on terror when we really need to understand that there are many such groups around the world, each separate and different, each requiring different tactics, each posing a different type of threat (in some cases, no threat) to our country.

Please remember that next time you hear these words. If you understand what has been said here, you will be able to determine how absurd such a claim is (war on terror) and look at what the person saying these words is really trying to do. He or she may be trying to scare you so you dont think clearly; he or she may be pushing an agenda to take rights away from you; he or she may be saying such words to get elected again; or to be considered patriotic or strong or effective. Always listen to the words and match them to the actions. The outcome may surprise you and open your eyes to what is actually going on.

Lumping all terrorists together, as the fear factor causes people to do, only blinds them to what is a complex situation and decreases the chance that any effective action can be taken.

I like Wesley Clark’s approach, which is realistic. Engage in Regional Diplomacy and stop overloading the military. It is not a military problem any more. Reickoff and Hackett has also said this. Enable governance and stability in that region before U.S. plans to end its “mission”. but the mission to reiterate is not militaristic but political and diplomatic.

Are the democrats stressing the “way forward” as much they stress on getting the troops out of harms way. I am guess their focus on troop reduction is a reaction to the frivolous charges from republicans that democrats don’t support the troops. Unfortunately yet again dems may allow repubs to dominate the discourse.

They should stress on the way forward.

A: Lieberman insulted the intelligence and impugned the patriotism of every American who disagrees with Bush: “[I]n matters of war we undermine presidential credibility at our nation’s peril.” No party’s tent is so big as to accomodate a senator for whom criticizing the leader of the opposition “imperils the nation.”

What the hell does Bush do? The Republicans run the entire show…what the hell do they do? Nothing or worse. Bribes, and fixed districts, and it would seem fixed voting. They rig and buy the news. They spout their bitter lies and spin through concert speakers any day that they need to, and they set it up in advance with insider knowledge.

F’in condescend to people, call people “Macaca”, make fun of hiring their illegal immigrants, say African Americans can’t swim (hmmm how about a gold medel in the Summer Olymics taken home for the United States (“Welcome to America” – to an American), make fun of Indian accent (Joe), and make fun of this and that.

Sen. Stevens from Alaska is super powerful and is largely “responsible” for the regulation (or maybe just profiteering) of the internet and he thinks “it’s a series of tubes” and his “internets” got clogged in there). One of the Republican tools that wanted to put the 10-commandments everywhere in government buildings could not even name 3 of them. “Duke” Cunningham has a blood stain of dishonor and filthy money on his hands for his traitor behavior. Tom DeLay sold K Street, and sold law, and tried to make as many of his crimes and theft legal as possible. They are sick, and election tampering should be considered high crimes and treason in our Democratic Republic (yeah like as in Republican). So should willful indifference to the sheer volume of lies to the People who vote – the intention is that educated/informed people can make the strongest selections in an election.

The sad thing is this is just a tiny rant compared to mountain of shit.

People must be taking stupid pills if they send the scum who exploit the world back to power with Bush the bubble head on the top. They can’t even lead America. They let the city of New Orleans flood and drown, while “nation building” in Iraq. And what does the Republican congress man say…some disaster capitalism statement like what we could not do for years God has done.

Oh…Bush makes up another lie that he read 60 books in his book competition with Rove. Yeah Rove is stuck at 50 books thus far…must be him and their crew to busy committing treason and having to worry about just a single investigation in all of the crimes they are pulling. God – so you read a book… your President go freaking lead you dummy. Don’t skate on America’s greatness and run our country into the ground cause you know you can hang on Americas neck dragging her down and just jump off and let us and the next generation keep her up, and make us mighty again.

The White Houses thing on how Bush is not a legacy guy – f*** that – they have been talking legacy and history will judge later since they let 9/11 happen on their watch as if the WH’s shit smells like the roses and flowers they dream of. Not leaving Iraq while you’re President Bush…whatever – think Jeb is gonna clean up your mess? So Bush, the “Decider” leaves it to his faith that America is great enough to overcome a decade of his idiocy at this time in our history…good hope & guess Decider – but DO YOU HAVE TO MAKE IT SO FUCKING HARD?

Bush’s legacy is a talentless hack sneak thief… and such a character lesson the world has never seen in an American President. Bush has an all Republican Government and vote counts, and all he can use if for is crimes, crimes, and more crimes. And every now and then try (people in general, not FDL specifically) to start the debate on items other than the Gulf War 2, because they are screwing everything up at least as bad and as hard.

egregious @ 208

In the interest of historical accuracy, the idea of trademarking the War on Terror appeared earlier, on May 18, in the first (and still #1) Spotlight Review of Glenn’s book.

Ahem. April 13, 2004.

I may have used it before then, but that was the earliest I could find in a quick search. And for all I know, someone beat me to the punch.

I bow before the Master. I mean, whoever was writing about Patriot bows before the Master.

egregious @ 111

Hey just checkin’ in. My mommy is here this week and we are being good little tourists.

How wonderful!
Does she live far away?

Ohio. Lifelong Republican. We are having talks about the ‘06 election. She is disgusted with what the Republicans have done especially locally.

Quote o’ the day: “I’ll vote for any Democrat who can brush his own teeth.”

Go mommy!!

How about: you know, we lost 1,200 people at Pearl Harbor and Hitler killed 6 million jews but we were in that war less than this one?

Was Saddam really more a threat than Hitler?

Or, the ever popular:

Did you ever figure out why we went into Iraq? Was it so Bush could get re-elected as a “War Preznit” as he said in 2000?

So does this mean that silicone can’t be packed? And if not, will we be forever consigned to being “lubeless” when we travel?

So much for my ambitions to make the mile-high club with that cute steward on the San Diego-Oakland run yesterday….

Late to this party – it was cat visitation night – but last winter I recall some semi driver, obviously not you, decided to avoid the weather delay on I5 in Gorman by taking CA-33 north from Ojai. He got stuck in the snow in Wheeler Gorge…. (We all were about ROFL because it’s not an easy truck route in good weather. One of your blistertitty roads, I believe.)