What is the "War on Terror"?

I would like everyone who is interested in this metaphor of the "War On Terror" to read this article by Susan Sontag who used to write a lot about metaphors and their consequences (in War, the AIDs virus etc) and how it shapes our thoughts.

dwij.org...

I think it is interesting, and even if you agree with the US's invasion of other countries to stop terrorism, what are your thoughts about the phrase "War on Terror"?

Please don't bring in arguments about the morality or justification of the US's invasion of other countries, only discussion about whether or not the phrase itself lends itself to an (almost) endless expansion of war (if the powers-that-be decided to.)

well we could stop this "war" but then they still be killing us since we are infidels to them. in anicase they just want the Islamic Empire that hasnt been seen for centuries. and they believe America is standing in the way which is pretty much why they are targeting us since we the only one who can stand in their way.

So you would propose changing the name to a war on islam? It is just as faceless and seems more specific to your thoughts.

Originally posted by CaptainJailew
So you would propose changing the name to a war on islam? It is just as faceless and seems more specific to your thoughts.

could be war on Islamic fanatics or Al Qaeda etc, u know Osama trained tens of thousands and sent them to overseas. so its his own Global Jihad.

I believe Terror is more suitable than Islam. The United States isn't declaring war on muslims. Mainly Muslim Fanatics.

Personnaly, I don't believe in "The War on Terror", its impossible to win since every country participates in terrorist acts.

The phrase could be changed to The Global War on Terror, because that's what it is, its an asymmetrical war with no set battle field and no uniformed troops. And we wont win unless the people who preach “death to America”, “kill the infidels”, “kill the great Satan” are put out of commission.

We had a War on Communism, and despite there still being a handful of Communist regimes left in the world, we haven't expanded the phrase for the sake of never-ending hostilities. Although it wasn't as officially labeled as the War on Terror, it nevertheless was a cold and sometimes hot battle that lasted several decades.

I don't feel the phrase "War on Terror" was scripted with the intentions of it being a "blank check," so to speak. I feel that this war should continue, be it through military action, financial measures, diplomatic pressure, and so on until every legitimate threat to freedom and democracy has been eliminated or severely impaired.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
we wont win unless the people who preach “death to America”, “kill the infidels”, “kill the great Satan” are put out of commission.

So when does it end? How long do you realistically think it will take for the US to destroy the idea to destroy America?

What if someone thinks "kill the infidels" but doesn't act on it? Certainly we can't be the thought police and kill them as well...

Originally posted by CaptainJailew
[What if someone thinks "kill the infidels" but doesn't act on it? Certainly we can't be the thought police and kill them as well...

well wen someone says kill the infidels, well u see wat happens after that, u seen Al Qaeda make videos sending messages to kill infidels and boom somewhere somewhen people gets blown and Al Qaeda claims it or someone linked to Al Qaeda. they thinking alright.

Terrorist in my perpestive are ghosts. Its nearly impossible to determin where they are at. Al Qaeda is "The Base", their is no base to find though; it literally is everywhere.

You can fight foreign Terroism in many different ways, Liberation of Afghanistan and Iraq, Homeland Security and border control.

war on terror is nothing more then a giant smoke screen for the United states to get its foothold on natural resourcses

since most of the terrorists were created by them

since most of the terrorists were created by them

OMFG I never get tired of these dumb AZZ comments, I got to tell you I I’m just laughing at that statement. Those people always say that everything thus does is wrong or evil so its not worth arguing with someone like that.
The US could give a billion tones of food and build thousands of homes in a third world country and I guarantee you those people will pop up and say “The U.S. only gives them food because we want to poison them” ,and “we build houses for them to get their oil“.

The "war on terror" to me is like the movie "commando" starring the one and only arnie, anyway swap the drug lords for terroists and i think it is a acurate depiction of the war on terror.
Anyone who has seen the movie will know what im trying to say.

Originally posted by WestPoint23

since most of the terrorists were created by them

OMFG I never get tired of these dumb AZZ comments

OMFG u are such an idiot
The US created Bin ladin and CO and other mjour terrorist groups by giving them money and weapons becuase they dont like current goverments or they have something to gain,

so it is u with the DUMB A$$ COMMENTS

Originally posted by Rasputin13
We had a War on Communism, and despite there still being a handful of Communist regimes left in the world, we haven't expanded the phrase for the sake of never-ending hostilities. Although it wasn't as officially labeled as the War on Terror, it nevertheless was a cold and sometimes hot battle that lasted several decades.

The War on Communism WAS expanded for the sake of US imperialism to mercilessly oppress anyone in Latin America that wanted anything that remotely smelled like socialism, like land reforms, unions, social program etcetera. Thousands in Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, Chile and other countries paid were killed in the name of the War on Communism or Cold War, whatever. It was also an excuse for military spending. It just isn't used anymore as none was buying it anymore after the USSR fell.

The War on Terror IS being expanded for new military spending on useless projects such as missile defense whereas America's enemies these days are armed only with AK 47s and North Korea can't even reach the US and could by using a ship or submarine launch easily circumvent a multi billion dollar investment. It IS being expanded to the benefit of the political/economic elite to wage wars like against Iraq while the link of Iraq with 9-11 was non existant. The military industrial complex and companies like Halliburton are counting their profits at the expense of the US taxpayer and at the expense of thousands of Iraqi lives. It IS being expanded to support brutal regimes like that in Uzbekistan, as long as those regimes play along and claim to be fighting the war on terror as well.

OMFG u are such an idiot
The US created Bin ladin and CO and other mjour terrorist groups by giving them money and weapons becuase they dont like current goverments or they have something to gain,

You act as if we gave Bin Laden money and resource to attack us, we supported him to defeat the Soviets which was our number one priority in the 80’s. It not like we purposely created hm attack us.
So take you dumb Azz theories and twisted facts where the sun don't shine.

The War on Communism WAS expanded for the sake of US imperialism to mercilessly oppress anyone in Latin America that wanted anything that remotely smelled like socialism, like land reforms, unions, social program etcetera. Thousands in Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, Chile and other countries paid were killed in the name of the War on Communism or Cold War, whatever. It was also an excuse for military spending. It just isn't used anymore as none was buying it anymore after the USSR fell.
Yeah, Che Guerva and Fidel Castro had their best interests in the people. I guess you think Cuba is a worker's paradise.

The War on Terror IS being expanded for new military spending on useless projects such as missile defense whereas America's enemies these days are armed only with AK 47s and North Korea can't even reach the US and could by using a ship or submarine launch easily circumvent a multi billion dollar investment. It IS being expanded to the benefit of the political/economic elite to wage wars like against Iraq while the link of Iraq with 9-11 was non existant. The military industrial complex and companies like Halliburton are counting their profits at the expense of the US taxpayer and at the expense of thousands of Iraqi lives. It IS being expanded to support brutal regimes like that in Uzbekistan, as long as those regimes play along and claim to be fighting the war on terror as well.
If North Korea was going to launch at missle, it would probably be against the DMZ, Seoul or Japan. We are using the missle shield to help our friends.

And let me ask you. What is your solution to prevent another 9/11?

Originally posted by RedWhiteandBlood
If North Korea was going to launch at missle, it would probably be against the DMZ, Seoul or Japan. We are using the missle shield to help our friends.

And let me ask you. What is your solution to prevent another 9/11?

1) Please change your image on your side info bar, it is huge and stretches my screen out which makes me cry.

2) Yes, I am sure NMD (NATIONAL missile defense) is a solely altruistic idea only to help protect our allies. It is more likely we need our allies in Turkey and Australia to forward deploy our radar so we can shoot down missiles coming to the continental US faster.

3) A solution? How about less volatile policies towards the Middle-East? Stopping unconditional support of Israel is one, maybe ending some sanctions on countries which kill civilians, stopping exploitation of young women and children who are victims of sex-traficking where we currently have forces stationed overseas, less invasive foreign policy....hmm, I don't know, but bombing their houses and neighborhoods will probably just make them more angry, don't you think? Unless your solution is to kill every single terrorist ever before they can strike the US, and maybe killing their children as well do they don't grow up angry at the US for murdering their father.

4) North Korea didn't create the Taepo-Dong 2 to hit South Korea or Japan, it was designed to reach the US, their intentions are nothing less than obvious. Yes, I am really sure they would attack the DMZ with nuclear weapons with it being so close to their own country. Heard of fallout? Even if you haven't I am sure they have.


Edit - added NKorea info

[edit on 17-6-2005 by CaptainJailew]

Originally posted by RedWhiteandBlood
Yeah, Che Guerva and Fidel Castro had their best interests in the people. I guess you think Cuba is a worker's paradise.

I never claimed that. I do claim that killing people for daring to ask social improvements isn't exactly in the best interest of people either.

Originally posted by RedWhiteandBlood
And let me ask you. What is your solution to prevent another 9/11?

Do not get me wrong, I am not just anti war for the sake of being anti war. The war in Afghanistan was necessary if you ask me, the war against Iraq was useless if it didn't cause even more terrorism. It would at least help to either pressure or just plainly thwart Saudi Arabia in exporting wahhabi fundamentalism, pressure them to stop supporting radical islamic imams in their own country as a trade-off for the corrupt rule of the Saudi monarchy and also try to do something about the thousands of madrassahs in Pakistan which are training new generations of terrorists. How the hell do you expect to be fighting terrorism without addressing that? It's like trying to dry a floor with the water tap still open.

Originally posted by CaptainJailew
4) North Korea didn't create the Taepo-Dong 2 to hit South Korea or Japan, it was designed to reach the US, their intentions are nothing less than obvious. Yes, I am really sure they would attack the DMZ with nuclear weapons with it being so close to their own country. Heard of fallout? Even if you haven't I am sure they have.

The intention is to use them as a deterrent, not as an attack weapon as you seem to think. North Korea is not going to fire them just like the USSR never fired their missiles: Kim Il-Jong knows well enough his socialist workers paradise would be transformed in a smoldering wasteland if he did launch. Hence, ballistic missile defense is utterly useless as the only one it could be used for is North Korea and they won't fire just for the fun of it. It would only be useful if the US intentions are to invade and attack North Korea, in which case it IS possible that they would launch missiles. So it is rather the other way around, the country which seems most likely to have intentions of attacking is the US. North Korea also won't "attack the DMZ" - which is the uninhabited demarkation zone that is just a few miles wide - or South Korea as its regime would implode soon enough afterwards.