GWOT: WTF?
Here's something sorta interesting from Kevin Drum, a quote from the general commanding Marine forces in the Pacific noting that the current unpleasantness is not a war on terrorism.
People have complained about the confusions--semantic and otherwise--surrounding this issue many times, and perhaps more griping isn't in order. It's been said that declaring a war on terrorism after 9/11 was like declaring war on Mexico after Pearl Harbor...but that's not right.
Rather, it's as if after Pearl Harbor we had, instead of declaring war on Japan, declared war on sneak attacks--that is, on the tactic rather than the institution that employed the tactic.
But linguistic sloppiness and the pressures of political rhetoric have confused things even more, making the war on terrorism into the war on "terror." So, to stick with our WWII analogy, it's as if we'd responded to Pearl Harbor with a "War on Sneakiness."
And what, exactly--or, hell, approximately--would a war on sneakiness--or "terror"--involve? Damned if I know.
Remember back when you were a kid? Remember how you thought that smart people were running the world? Fortunately or unfortunately, the grim truth reveals itself so slowly that the shock and disappointment are bearable.
Here's something sorta interesting from Kevin Drum, a quote from the general commanding Marine forces in the Pacific noting that the current unpleasantness is not a war on terrorism.
People have complained about the confusions--semantic and otherwise--surrounding this issue many times, and perhaps more griping isn't in order. It's been said that declaring a war on terrorism after 9/11 was like declaring war on Mexico after Pearl Harbor...but that's not right.
Rather, it's as if after Pearl Harbor we had, instead of declaring war on Japan, declared war on sneak attacks--that is, on the tactic rather than the institution that employed the tactic.
But linguistic sloppiness and the pressures of political rhetoric have confused things even more, making the war on terrorism into the war on "terror." So, to stick with our WWII analogy, it's as if we'd responded to Pearl Harbor with a "War on Sneakiness."
And what, exactly--or, hell, approximately--would a war on sneakiness--or "terror"--involve? Damned if I know.
Remember back when you were a kid? Remember how you thought that smart people were running the world? Fortunately or unfortunately, the grim truth reveals itself so slowly that the shock and disappointment are bearable.
posted by Winston Smith at
6:37 AM
5 Comments:
Re: "It's been said that declaring a war on terrorism after 9/11 was like declaring war on Mexico after Pearl Harbor"
Did people say that? The comparison I remember was that invading Iraq after 9/11 was like declaring war on Mexico after Pearl Harbor.
Jeez, I've never thought smart people were running the world -- otherwise, how to explain .... well, you fill in the blanks.
As for linguistic sloppiness, mightn't a war against, say, facists also be called a war against facism? And by extension ...
It's a very interesting article, and so are the comments, which are well-observed by both L & R. Except for the desire to blame someone, the R for impetuousness, the L for wussitude, the problems are laid out well.
Rhetorically, the GWOT is more accurately a war on militant Islam. A political figure, Tony Blair for instance, can hardly use that locution tho, since the "militant" part can easily be lost in translation, leaving an impression that must be avoided at all costs.
Drum points out that the problem is the "neutral" Muslim. True, and key. If one studies Islam a bit, one finds it is impermissible to hand over a Muslim to the justice of the infidel. Joe Muslim becomes a de facto ally, at least by the Bush Doctrine. Heard a Brit on the radio today saying that of course the identities of today's murderous bombers are no doubt known in Britain's mosques. Information will not be forthcoming.
The situation in Iraq is plain: the Islamofascists kill more Iraqis than coalition troops. When the Muslim world accepts totalitarian Islam as their problem, too, some sort of metric progress will be measurable.
If they never do, the world as we know it is doomed, folks. A little more of this or less of that will make no difference. The greatest problems of man cannot be solved by calculators and MBAs, even those who got straight A's.
What a sloppy comment, Marc.
Just because some said 'Iraq' doesn't mean that others didn't say 'terrorism'...they did. It was a relatively common observation.
And even if that relatively minor point *were* wrong, it wouldn't affect the overall point.
Tsk, tsk. DO try to focus, Marc...
"No Charge Online Advertising Channels For Any Business"
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home