1. Welcome to CowboysZone!  Join us!  Come on!  You know you want to!

White House: 'War on terrorism' is over... kind of...

Discussion in 'Political Zone' started by JBond, Sep 1, 2009.

  1. JBond

    JBond Well-Known Member

    6,726 Messages
    36 Likes Received
    White House: 'War on terrorism' is over on Aug 6th

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/aug/06/white-house-war-terrorism-over/?feat=home_headlines

    It's official. The U.S. is no longer engaged in a "war on terrorism." Neither is it fighting "jihadists" or in a "global war."

    President Obama's top homeland security and counterterrorism official took all three terms off the table of acceptable words inside the White House during a speech Thursday at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank.

    "The President does not describe this as a 'war on terrorism,'" said John Brennan, head of the White House homeland security office, who outlined a "new way of seeing" the fight against terrorism.

    The only terminology that Mr. Brennan said the administration is using is that the U.S. is "at war with al Qaeda."

    "We are at war with al Qaeda," he said. "We are at war with its violent extremist allies who seek to carry on al Qaeda's murderous agenda."

    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in March that the administration was not using the term "war on terror" but no specific directive had come from the White House itself. Mr. Obama himself used the term "war on terror" on Jan. 23, his fourth day as president, but has not used it since.

    Mr. Brennan's speech was aimed at outlining ways in which the Obama administration intends to undermine the "upstream" factors that create an environment in which terrorists are bred.

    The president's adviser talked about increasing aid to foreign governments for building up their militaries and social and democratic institutions, but provided few details about how the White House will do that.

    He was specific about ways in which Mr. Obama believes words influence the way America prosecutes the fight against terrorism.

    Mr. Brennan said that to say the U.S. is fighting "jihadists" is wrongheaded because it is using "a legitimate term, 'jihad,' meaning to purify oneself or to wage a holy struggle for a moral goal" which "risks giving these murderers the religious legitimacy they desperately seek but in no way deserve."

    But now it back when Obama's poll numbers are crashing

    Obama Spokesman: White House can't under resource 'most important part of the 'war on terror'... *

    White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs used the term "war on terror" at today's press conference.


    ====================================

    The many faces of Obama continues. I expect the the lefties of the board to show some disgust finally. Obama is using the evil war for a diversion from his failures here at home.
  2. zrinkill

    zrinkill Diamond surrounded by trash

    33,045 Messages
    789 Likes Received
    Instead of the "War on Terror" ...... it will now be known as "Trying to prevent our friends from killing to many of our own people by being super nice and understanding" then after a brief pause "Obammmaaaa"
  3. vta

    vta The Proletariat

    8,746 Messages
    5 Likes Received
    This is good news. We are so strong that even in the middle of a war we can quibble over words. I'll bet al qaeda doesn't have time for meetings and spread sheets and concerns of acceptable terms. They're too busy fighting.

    Go U.S.A.!
  4. Doomsday101

    Doomsday101 Well-Known Member

    78,457 Messages
    3,768 Likes Received
    I think the administration is taking us in a different direction one we had before 9/11 where we treat these as criminal acts. We are now telling the CIA you will not interrogate that will be the FBI who will do that. Last time I checked the CIA means intelligent agency whose job is to gather information the FBI on the other hand is a law enforcement agency. Looks like we will take a step backwards and get back into reactionary response after the fact.
  5. vta

    vta The Proletariat

    8,746 Messages
    5 Likes Received
    Apparently the reaction will have to take place under another administration, much like in the 90's, with the idea of 'apprehending' stooges and leaving the source to continue functioning.
  6. zrinkill

    zrinkill Diamond surrounded by trash

    33,045 Messages
    789 Likes Received
    That is what the extreme left wants.
  7. bbgun

    bbgun Benched

    27,868 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    If there is no war on terror, then what are we doing in Afghanistan of all places? And why did Gibbs use the phrase "war on terror" (which they once used to mock) in his press conference yesterday?
  8. burmafrd

    burmafrd Well-Known Member

    41,808 Messages
    1,674 Likes Received
    And do you think any of the usual suspects (MSNBC, NBC, NYT, etc) will ask about it anytime soon?
  9. Hoofbite

    Hoofbite Well-Known Member

    32,585 Messages
    2,242 Likes Received
    You should tune-in to find out.
  10. Bob Sacamano

    Bob Sacamano Benched

    57,073 Messages
    1 Likes Received
    this is ********

    all it is, is the new administration making the war "their own"
  11. ologan

    ologan Well-Known Member

    3,818 Messages
    262 Likes Received
    "Mr. Brennan said that to say the U.S. is fighting "jihadists" is wrongheaded because it is using "a legitimate term, 'jihad,' meaning to purify oneself or to wage a holy struggle for a moral goal" which "risks giving these murderers the religious legitimacy they desperately seek but in no way deserve."

    well,I guess if "Jihad" is a legitimate word,so is "Crusaders".

Share This Page