“War on Terror” a misnomer

We need to rename the “War on Terror”. Maybe we should call it “Guarding Against Terrorism”. I don’t know, but I’m open to suggestions.

9/11 scared the bejesus out of me. I realize fear is unbecoming of a middle-aged Southern boy. Nevertheless it did. Still does. It’s time to put it in perspective though.

I never thought twice as the US embarked on the “War on Terror”. It was obvious something had to be done about al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan. I’d have nuked ’em, but nobody asked me.

To hear our government tell it, we’re still waging the “War on Terror”. We will be, they promise, for a generation. Our leaders want us to believe our way of life is under attack. It may be, but not from the terrorists. The politicians want us to be afraid so they can usurp our rights and do things like invade other countries in our name. It’s worked well for them so far.

The fact is, though, being afraid of Muslim fanatics is just ridiculous. Yes, 9/11 was a horrific event. If terrorists could pull something similar off on a somewhat regular basis, then it would make sense to fear them. But to fear them, in light of who and what they really are, is ridiculous. (But flattering, I’m sure, for the terrorist themselves).

Oil is the only thing we need that is produced in the Muslim world. It seems safe to surmise that if the western oil companies shut down their operations, dismantled their wells, storage facilities, and pipelines, the oil would stay right where it is, under the sand, until someone from outside the Muslim world extracted it. Muslims lack the technology to do much of anything for themselves. Sadly, the only things they are good at making are terrorists and WMD. Such a people don’t constitute much of threat to our way of life.

Consider tiny Israel. They are some six million strong, surrounded by a billion Muslims, most of whom profess to want Israel wiped from the face of the earth. But they’re still there, right in the Muslim’s backyard. The US is infinitely more powerful than Israel, not to mention exponentially further removed from the apex of the threat.

It’s time to rename the “War on Terror”. It’s time to tell the government we expect them to protect us, not scare us to death, and certainly not infringe on our rights. In reality the politicians are a much greater threat to the American way of life than are the terrorists.



Filed under Economics, Military, Politics, Terrorism

11 responses to ““War on Terror” a misnomer

  1. Provocative post – I agree with you to some degree. I do believe though that we are dealing with more than muslims from 3rd world countries – there are millions who have converted who do know and can use technology (for instance the folks who had that ad-fab plan to blow up the planes from london to new york?) And the converts keep rolling along.

    I agree that politicians are essentially full of shit. But honestly I think the thing that is really killing us is the political correctness virus. If not for that we would have glassed those a***holes and been done with it. And Lil Kim and Imajihad would be keeping their big yaps shut and behaving themselves.

    It all goes back to finding someone who has enough balls to saying “no!” to the whiners and babies and deal with this crap swiftly and effectively.

    So, I’m not sure if we agree or disagree but that’s my two cents.

  2. J

    writerchick – I’m for exterminating a whole bunch of them. Unfortunately when we had the chance, we didn’t take it. Some of them want to afford us another opportunity. I’d sleep fine tonight knowing there were no Pakistanis and/or Iranians. There’s no doubt it would do wonders for the attitude of those we chose to spare. Look at Japan.

    My point is more that they aren’t coming over here on ships, or in planes, or whatever, and forcing the sharia on us. Nobody that’s not indoctrinated into that vile bullshit as a child is ever going to embrace it, unless they are crazy. They are a threat to the prosperity of their progeny, nothing more.

    I’m just sick of the bullshit. The World Wars were wars. So was the Civil War. When we do have go to war, really, I want someone of the General Sherman mindset calling the shots. We still hate that bastard down here, but we damn sure don’t talk about seceding except in whispers among ourselves.

  3. Okay, J…I’m with you on this.

  4. lightcontrast

    They should definitely rename the “War on Terror.” How can you fight terror? Terror is an idea. How do you destroy ideas?

  5. J

    light – I saw Bush blathering about all the danger and the clash of civilizations and all that today in his press conference. If that’s true, why don’t we nuke them in order to save ourselves (before they all go nuclear)? It’s just BS, the proverbial boogie man hiding under the bed. Fear is the primary tool the state has to keep us (the masses) in line.

  6. Pink Slip

    I agree Light—you can’t fight a war on terrorism. Imo, the war is just a way to run the debt waaaaaay up, and then cut gov’t to the bone when it eventually has to be paid for. And voila! There’s your small gov’t. (Since they can’t cut gov’t the old-fashion way)

  7. lightcontrast


    He’s always blathering. He made it a point to disagree with Blair on the situation in Iraq. I heard that the US is short on nukes, but I don’t really know.

  8. lightcontrast

    Pink slip,

    I agree, it is extremely costly. The government is never cut to the bone because of all the corruption going on, I guess.

  9. J

    light – I think we admit to having a couple thousand nukes. So I’d guess we have about 4,000.

    My point is that if “radical Islam” is anywhere near as much a threat as Bush would have us believe, then why doesn’t he do something about it? I mean, everybody knows (most of) the fanatics are in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Iran. If they are a clear and present danger, lets cancel their asses, both the good and the bad. I mean, if somebody has to loose, better them than me.

    They aren’t a terminal disease for us though. They are a pain in the ass. Yes, some of their especially crazy people are capable of killing themselves and bunch of civilians in the process. But does that really threaten our civilization?

    Of course not. Should they somehow manage to hit us with a nuke, it would be the end of their civilization, not ours. Engaging them conventionally, in their own backyard, just makes us look stupid.

    And thinking free market democracy is some sort of magic bullet for the ills in the Muslim world is lunacy, not to mention insulting to the Muslims.

    End of rant.

  10. I agree that we shouldn’t think that terrorism is a threat to our way of life. I constantly explain to people that if we had 9/11 every year it would still only be the same number of people killed as die in car crashes in the UK every year. As it is, the actual threat is nicely summed up in an article in the journal Foreign Affairs:

    But while keeping such potential dangers in mind, it is worth remembering that the total number of people killed since 9/11 by al Qaeda or al Qaeda­like operatives outside of Afghanistan and Iraq is not much higher than the number who drown in bathtubs in the United States in a single year, and that the lifetime chance of an American being killed by international terrorism is about one in 80,000 — about the same chance of being killed by a comet or a meteor. Even if there were a 9/11-scale attack every three months for the next five years, the likelihood that an individual American would number among the dead would be two hundredths of a percent (or one in 5,000).

    So we agree on the threat of terrorism, and the threat to our way of life posed by our politicans. But on the other hand, I don’t like the way you talk about Muslims and Muslim countries. Sentences such as

    I’d have nuked ‘em, but nobody asked me.


    I’m for exterminating a whole bunch of them.

    don’t fit well with your saying of the Muslim countries around Israel

    … most of whom profess to want Israel wiped from the face of the earth…

    I’m not going to go out of my way to defend a country like Iran which is a dictatorship and a partly theocratic one at that, but it is wrong of you to say

    Oil is the only thing we need that is produced in the Muslim world.

    Even if it were true, we would bear some responsibility for this as our governments have supported dictatorships which guarantee stable oil supply (Saudi Arabia for example). But it’s not even true. To give one example, Iran is pursuing stem cell research which can’t be done in the US because it’s illegal (thanks to the religious right for that). If the US doesn’t bomb the country into oblivion, this research could potentially make an enormous contribution to medicine around the world.

  11. J

    Dan – Glad you stopped by. I enjoy your posts and comments. Don’t always agree, but there’s no doubt in my mind you know your stuff. Peace.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s