The "War on Terror" has ended. It is now the "Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism". We've gone from WOT to GSAVE.
The Bush Administration Thesaurus Team has yet again changed the name of something in hopes of changing perception.
I say "good".
More below the fold...
Let them change it. And we should welcome it, because it eliminates one of the last vestiges of unequivocal support that this administration has counted on.
Since 9/11, we have been told that the country is on a "war footing"; that this president is a "Wartime president"; that it is unpatriotic to criticize an administration in a "time of war".
Say buh-bye.
It's not a war anymore. Ask Rumsfeld, Myers, or any of the other spin-sters. No, it is now GSAVE. Fine with me. Because it's no longer a war. And he's no longer a wartime president. And if it's not a war, why are our troops in Iraq? And if it's global, where is the global support? And if we're not at war, why aren't we doing more to defend ourselves at home?
And then there are the real questions, the ones that this "name change" brings up. Why change the name? What does it really mean?
The answer is simple: You can't lose a war that doesn't exist. The Bush administration never had a plan for getting out of Iraq. But we were at "war", so they didn't need one, right? But with support for US presence in Iraq falling faster by the minute, they need to get out. Pulling out while it's a "war" means defeat. "Mission Accomplished" becomes "Mission Failed". Instead of declaring that they screwed up, that hundreds of servicemen and thousands of Iraqis have died in a poorly planned and falsely justified action, they'll just change the name and hope no one notices.
Sorry, I noticed. In fact, many folks have noticed.
The original justification for going to Iraq was that Saddam was a threat because he was producing WMD. That was, at best, a gross overstatement, and at worst, a flat out lie. Faced with being caught with their hand in the proverbial cookie jar, they changed the justification to the "War on Terror"; Saddam was harboring terrorists, they said, and needed to be removed because it would attack the terrorists there before they came here.
However, there was another reality check in store. There was very little terrorism in Iraq before the US stormed in. The acts of terrorism seen now are a response to US forces in the ground, and are increasing every day. Iraqis live with the reality of over 60 violent attacks in their country every day. Hundreds are dying each week, killed by actions that are being exacerbated by the presence of US troops, troops who themselves are taking casualties on a daily basis.
But remember, our troops were to be greeted as heroic liberators, with images of flowers being strewn at their feet. A fantasy at best.
Now, with support waning here at home, and the justifications for being in Iraq all reduced to falsehoods and fabrications, the administration is looking for a way to come out of the mess without letting the American public know they'd been duped into a useless military action that has done nothing to improve (and in fact have worsened) the conditions that breed terrorism around the world. So they change the name. If it's not a war, you aren't losing. A struggle is much more nebulous. There's a whole bunch more wiggle room. And they need it.
They've tried to morph the whole thing into "spreading freedom and democracy". But it's not flying. While we often hear how gullible American populace is, they have a finite amount of patience for lies. The first one, they'll excuse, to the point of bending their own logic to find ways to accept the lie as truth. This is what happened after 9/11. As a whole, the country wanted not just justice, but revenge. And they were played. The administration used that need for retribution to justify the run-up to going into Iraq.
But they knew that the need for vengeance would cool. And Americans wouldn't stand for just invading another country because they had a bad guy running the country. No, they needed to be convinced that he was coming after them. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Nothing. But the administration did their level best to connect the dots, particularly the ones that didn't exist.
The Rove/Libby leak scandal shows the depths to which this administration would sink to ensure their "spin" on Iraq would stay up front. And it worked. At the time of the 2004 elections, a large portion of the American electorate was convinced that Saddam Hussein was intimately involved in the 9/11 attacks. Images of atomic explosions and roving WMD factories on trucks had been burned into their consciousness. And they were all fabrications. There was no nuclear program, there were no WMD factories. But the spin machine had worked. And the meme of the "wartime president" had taken hold.
Flash forward to the present. The WMD claims have been revealed for their falsity. The connections between 9/11 and Iraq have been debunked. The administration's intentions to go into Iraq regardless of any real proof have been exposed by investigative committees and in items like the Downing Street Memos/Minutes. White House officials are implicated in the exposure of a CIA operative whose job it was to analyze WMD, and whose blown cover may be just the tip of the iceberg in intelligence fallout.
So, before the whole house of cards falls down, they change the name. Instead of a "war", it's a struggle. "War" implies enemies and combatants. A winner and a loser. But the administration know that they can't win the "war on terror", making them the loser. Can't have that! Make it a struggle. No implied foe, no implied resolution. It's a struggle, after all.
And let's look at that "struggle". A "global struggle against violent extremism". What fits into that description. Certainly, planes flying into buildings and bombs going off in subways. But how about attacking abortion clinics, their employees, and their patients because you don't believe in abortion. Does that count? How about espousing the belief that "activist judges" are getting what they deserve when they or their families are gunned down, because you don't agree with their decisions? Is that violent extremism? It's a global struggle, after all. Should the UK send troops over to help quell the extremists? Peraps Poland should send their forces over as part of a "coalition".
Not likely.
But they are questions that should be asked. After all, it's not a war anymore. Bush is no longer a wartime president. We are no longer on a war footing. With no war, this administration has little left to fall back on.
Let them have their GSAVE, as it only further lays bare their lies and obfuscations. Help them with their meme. There is no more "War on Terror". It's only a struggle. There is no more "wartime" for this president to hang his hat on. Make sure everyone you know hears it. They were the first to say "Bring It On". With no war, it's time to say "Bring Them Home".
Encourage your representatives in government to spread this meme. There's no war. War's over. Why'd we go there in the first place?