« Home

Opening The Files: 6/02/06

GWOT or no GWOT?

Early this week, Pachacutec touched off a bit of a debate about the concept of the "War on Terror" by saying that there isn't one.

Digby reminds us that it actually started out as the "War on Terrorism" but that even that idea, that you can declare war on a type of warfare, is absurd. Good point. Declaring war on terrorism, a tactic, would have been like declaring war on "sneak attacks" after Pearl Harbor. Sounds silly but that's essentially what our government has been doing for the last five years. Or not doing, depending on who you talk to.

Like John, who says that he is all for the War on Terror whenever the hell they decide to get started on it again. We did get kinda sidetracked in Iraq, which according to Andrew Sullivan, Bush didn't seem to take as seriously has he should have even though it was deemed the central front in this "war".

And now that the funding has been cut for the two cities that were attacked on 9/11 because of a lack of sites worth protecting, how serious do you suppose the Bush administration really is about their "War on Terror"?

Or is this just another case of them playing politics with terror?