Relabel the "war on terror"
That was the suggestion of Army Col. Gary Cheek, chief of strategic planning on the Pentagon's Joint Staff. Col. Cheek feels that we should do away with the "war" label. I tend to agree with that assessment.
Indeed, if recent events are any indication, good intelligence gathering and law enforcement are far better suited for fighting terrorism then invasion and occupation.
There is another aspect, one which I have noted myself, that makes relabeling the GWOT not such a bad idea.
Again from Cheeks:
It makes sense. All the recent talk of Al-Qaeda and other terrorists being as much of a threat (if not more so) then the Nazi's or the Soviet Union only emboldens them further. They are encouraged by such rhetoric, which makes its use all the more idiotic.
Of course changing the name of the war on terror, as Col. Cheek says "changes the dynamic of the conflict". This is something Bush most certainly does not want to do. He wants to be forever portrayed as a "war president". A change now would also mean his argument for a wide range of legally questionable activities would no longer apply.
And because this would leave Bush vulnerable to possibly impeachable offenses, this conflict will remain a "war".
"It makes sense for us to find another name for the GWOT," ...."It merits rethinking. I know our European allies are more comfortable articulating issues of terrorism as criminal threats, rather than war ... It ought to be our goal to partner better with the European allies so we can migrate this from a war to something other than a war."
Indeed, if recent events are any indication, good intelligence gathering and law enforcement are far better suited for fighting terrorism then invasion and occupation.
There is another aspect, one which I have noted myself, that makes relabeling the GWOT not such a bad idea.
Again from Cheeks:
The "war" moniker elevates al-Qaida and other transnational terrorists, giving them legitimacy as an opposition force to the United States. It also tends to alienate Muslim populations in other countries, who see the war as a war on Islam, and feel they need to support al-Qaida as a matter of defending their faith.
It makes sense. All the recent talk of Al-Qaeda and other terrorists being as much of a threat (if not more so) then the Nazi's or the Soviet Union only emboldens them further. They are encouraged by such rhetoric, which makes its use all the more idiotic.
Of course changing the name of the war on terror, as Col. Cheek says "changes the dynamic of the conflict". This is something Bush most certainly does not want to do. He wants to be forever portrayed as a "war president". A change now would also mean his argument for a wide range of legally questionable activities would no longer apply.
And because this would leave Bush vulnerable to possibly impeachable offenses, this conflict will remain a "war".
Post a Comment