Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: "War on Terror is now called ..." Rumsfield

  1. #1
    A Veteran Wargamer Member kiwitt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Posts
    915

    Default "War on Terror is now called ..." Rumsfield

    ... "global struggle against violent extremism."

    Donald Rumsfeld's spokesman, Lawrence DiRita, said that the change in language was "not a shift in thinking,"
    LINK
    This is a much more accurate term.
    Last edited by kiwitt; 08-02-2005 at 02:53.
    We work to live, and to live is to, play "Total War" or drive a VR-4

  2. #2
    Master of Few Words Senior Member KukriKhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    10,415

    Default Re: "War on Terror is now called ..." Rumsfield

    OMG. I guess it was inevitable.


    No more extreme-ism. Put away your boards, chutes, sails, etc.
    Be well. Do good. Keep in touch.

  3. #3
    Mad Professor Senior Member Hurin_Rules's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Alberta and Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    2,433

    Default Re: "War on Terror is now called ..." Rumsfield

    The problem with 'War on Terror' as a catchphrase, of course, is that if it is a war, the US could well be considered to be loosing. Terrorist attacks, ensuing casualties and fear are up dramatically worldwide since the war began. Most Americans now think the war in Iraq has made their country less safe. Instead of changing policy, the Bush administration has decided to opt for the bandaid solution: change the name to make it appear that their approach is working. Personally, I'm waiting for the next change in the name, probably to something like, 'the eternal struggle between Good and Evil'. How could anyone oppose that?
    "I love this fellow God. He's so deliciously evil." --Stuart Griffin

  4. #4

    Default Re: "War on Terror is now called ..." Rumsfield

    Donald Rumsfeld's spokesman, Lawrence DiRita, said that the change in language was "not a shift in thinking,"
    Donald Rumsfeld......thinking....?
    Now you know they are only having a laugh .

  5. #5
    Lord of the House Flies Member Al Khalifah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Golden Caliphate
    Posts
    1,644

    Default Re: "War on Terror is now called ..." Rumsfield

    And the US in no longer called the United States of America, but the People's Federal Democratic Republic of the New World (plc).
    Cowardice is to run from the fear;
    Bravery is not to never feel the fear.
    Bravery is to be terrified as hell;
    But to hold the line anyway.

  6. #6
    Mad Professor Senior Member Hurin_Rules's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Alberta and Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    2,433

    Default Re: "War on Terror is now called ..." Rumsfield

    I thought it was [EDIT].

    Well, I was trying to make a reference to Karl Rove's nickname (those of you who know it can probably guess what I was suggesting), but I have been informed that this might be considered derogatory. My apologies.
    Last edited by Hurin_Rules; 08-02-2005 at 16:46.
    "I love this fellow God. He's so deliciously evil." --Stuart Griffin

  7. #7

    Default Re: "War on Terror is now called ..." Rumsfield

    Quote Originally Posted by Hurin_Rules
    Most Americans now think the war in Iraq has made their country less safe.
    It is a problem when you attribute your view and the views of those whom you surround yourself with to everyone else. Humans also have a propensity to read, listen to, and absorb information that supports our own view. I am guilty of this too.

    I am not so arrogant as to think that I know what "most americans" think.

    How about this:

    Most Americans voted for George W. Bush. (Maybe not the first time, myself included)
    "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." -Einstein

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    The Backroom is the Crackroom.

  8. #8
    Mad Professor Senior Member Hurin_Rules's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Alberta and Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    2,433

    Default Re: "War on Terror is now called ..." Rumsfield

    Actually no, I was being quite specific. The polls are all here, for your perusal:

    http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

    When asked whether they thought the war in Iraq had made their country more or less safe, 54% of Americans said less safe, compared to only 40% who said more.

    I don't make claims like that unless I can back them up.
    Last edited by Hurin_Rules; 08-03-2005 at 01:20.
    "I love this fellow God. He's so deliciously evil." --Stuart Griffin

  9. #9
    Chieftain of the Pudding Race Member Evil_Maniac From Mars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    6,407

    Default Re: "War on Terror is now called ..." Rumsfield

    Quote Originally Posted by Tribesman
    Donald Rumsfeld......thinking....?
    Now you know they are only having a laugh .

  10. #10
    The very model of a modern Moderator Xiahou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    in the cloud.
    Posts
    9,007

    Default Re: "War on Terror is now called ..." Rumsfield

    Quote Originally Posted by Hurin_Rules
    Actually no, I was being quite specific. The polls are all here, for your perusal:

    http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

    When asked whether they thought the war in Iraq had made their country more or less safe, 54% of Americans said less safe, compared to only 40% who said more.

    I don't make claims like that unless I can back them up.
    According to CNN anyhow... If you'd ask Pew research they'd say a majority of Americans think it has made no difference or made American more safe.
    "Don't believe everything you read online."
    -Abraham Lincoln

  11. #11
    Mad Professor Senior Member Hurin_Rules's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Alberta and Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    2,433

    Default Re: "War on Terror is now called ..." Rumsfield

    Quote Originally Posted by Xiahou
    According to CNN anyhow... If you'd ask Pew research they'd say a majority of Americans think it has made no difference or made American more safe.
    Here are the stats:

    "Do you think the war in Iraq has helped the war on terrorism, or has it hurt the war on terrorism?" Form 1 (N=751, MoE ▒ 4)

    Helped Hurt No Effect Unsure


    39 47 7 7


    "In the long run, do you think the war in Iraq has increased the chances of terrorist attacks in the U.S., lessened the chances, or has it made no difference?" Form 2 (N=751, MoE ▒ 4)

    .
    Increased Lessened No Difference Unsure


    45 22 30 3


    As you can see, more Americans think the war in Iraq has hurt the war on terrorism than have helped it. More Americans think the war in Iraq has increased the chances of terrorist attacks than decreased it. More Americans also think the war in Iraq has increased the chances of terrorits attacks than made no difference.
    Last edited by Hurin_Rules; 08-03-2005 at 05:02.
    "I love this fellow God. He's so deliciously evil." --Stuart Griffin

  12. #12

    Default Re: "War on Terror is now called ..." Rumsfield

    The CNN polls showed John Kerry winning the election as well.

    People put so much creedence in polls, yet they only ask a couple thousand people..

  13. #13
    Corporate Hippie Member rasoforos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Athens, Greece
    Posts
    2,713

    Default Re: "War on Terror is now called ..." Rumsfield

    More than one poll shows that people, even in the US, have seen the irrationality behind attacking Iraq. I think that even the conservatives can see that and they could see it all along ( who really believed Iraq had WMD'S ? ), but they wanted to watch a war on TV and now it all went wrong.

    If the illegal occupation of Iraq helped someone then that someone is Al Qaeda since they gained millions of sympathisers, another safe-heaven and a good field to train and develop guerrila techniques.

    Considering the 'war on terror'. Its a bit dificult to maintain this term since in most countries its laughable. The US, and particularly the current administration, is consistently and repeatedly terrorising nations into submission and without remorse and, because of its own actions, is seen as the main global terrorist by billions of people. Good job guys...

    Even the current rushed attempt of nations like Iran and Korea to develop nuclears is the outcome of such a stupid approach. If the US really feared that nukes would be stolen and used for terrorism purposes then Pakistan would be thr major target since Al Qaeda is very strong there, there have been Pakistani suicide bombers and the government is ran by a military dictator. The problem with such nations developing nukes is not that they might attack the US ( suicidical ), it that the US cannot attack them. A short range nuke barrage can take out a carrier or two with its assorted escort ships knocking a few teeth out of the US war machine...
    Αξιζει φιλε να πεθανεις για ενα ονειρο, κι ας ειναι η φωτια του να σε καψει.

    http://grumpygreekguy.tumblr.com/

  14. #14
    Feeding the Peanut Gallery Senior Member Redleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Denver working on the Railroad
    Posts
    10,660

    Default Re: "War on Terror is now called ..." Rumsfield

    Quote Originally Posted by rasoforos
    More than one poll shows that people, even in the US, have seen the irrationality behind attacking Iraq. I think that even the conservatives can see that and they could see it all along ( who really believed Iraq had WMD'S ? ), but they wanted to watch a war on TV and now it all went wrong.
    Hmm - I remember seeing live chemical rounds sitting on the Iraqi gunlines that we overran during Desert Storm. I remember reading the Duefer report that states clearly that Saddam's regime did everything in their power to make it look like they maintained some capablity to produce and use certain WMD's. I remember seeing newscasts on the missles that violated the cease-fire agreed range limitations. Then there is th ineffective sarin gas IED that have either been used or found. Then there is the precruser that has been found.

    If the illegal occupation of Iraq helped someone then that someone is Al Qaeda since they gained millions of sympathisers, another safe-heaven and a good field to train and develop guerrila techniques.
    Its not an illegal occupation no matter how many times it is claimed. The United States Congress authorized the use of force against Iraq. The Hague Convention of 1907 clearly spells out what the warring party must do when it destroys the politicial infrastructure of another nation.

    Considering the 'war on terror'. Its a bit dificult to maintain this term since in most countries its laughable. The US, and particularly the current administration, is consistently and repeatedly terrorising nations into submission and without remorse and, because of its own actions, is seen as the main global terrorist by billions of people. Good job guys...
    Now failed policy is a legimate criticism.

    Even the current rushed attempt of nations like Iran and Korea to develop nuclears is the outcome of such a stupid approach. If the US really feared that nukes would be stolen and used for terrorism purposes then Pakistan would be thr major target since Al Qaeda is very strong there, there have been Pakistani suicide bombers and the government is ran by a military dictator. The problem with such nations developing nukes is not that they might attack the US ( suicidical ), it that the US cannot attack them. A short range nuke barrage can take out a carrier or two with its assorted escort ships knocking a few teeth out of the US war machine...

    North Korea has been pursueing nuclear weapons long before President Bush even thought about running for office. Same with Iran. These attempts are not rushed like you are attempting to allude to here. North Korea and Iran started their attempts to develop nuclear weapons before the ink was even dry on the treaties they signed to get nuclear technology to develop nuclear power plants.

    I could tell you a few things about the nuclear program in North Korea that would scare you - but if you want to blame Bush for their "current rushed attempt" then its not worth the effort. But I suggest you try a google search of - North Korea Nuclear weapons.

    Just the first listed hit on the subject - shows data about North Korea's nuclear ambitions date back to the 1980's.

    http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB87/#docs
    O well, seems like 'some' people decide to ruin a perfectly valid threat. Nice going guys... doc bean

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO