Topic: War On Terror
The War on Anything The "War on Terror" engenders a ho-hum response by everyday folks. By declaring wars on concepts, the phrase loses its impact. War is too serious a concept to be used for ideological marketing.by Bob Nightingale
(libertarian)
Sunday, May 18, 2008
What have you done today to win the "War on Terror"? Did you go to the shopping mall? Is today's terror alert level orange or purple? Did you turn in your neighbor for suspected ties to al-Qaeda? I didn't think so.
I don't have neighbors who are up to anything interesting. I live at the end of a cul-de-sac with retirees and a two-income couple with their adult son. The lot next door is empty, if anyone wants to build. At 44, I'm the youngest homeowner on the block. It's not terribly exciting. I like it that way. I also don't have an urge to fight terrorism by shopping. I guess that makes my wife more patriotic than me.
When I talk to my neighbors about World War Two, I see their misty eyes and hear of the fond memories from their youth. In the 1940s this country was united against a terrible enemy who wanted to take over the world. We were attacked by a real enemy who possessed battleships and dive bombers. War was declared on us by two nations who had already invaded their neighbors, and the industrial capacity to cross the ocean to threaten us. The argument that we have to fight them there so they wouldn't come here made a lot of sense. Germany had U-boats off the coast of New Jersey and Japan had already attacked Pearl Harbor. It was war and we had to all chip in for victory.
I politely smile at my veteran neighbor because I have never lived under those conditions. Instead, my childhood had more to do with disco and roller skating. I learned in school that our military and the other side had such great weapons that neither side would be so foolish to use them. Strangely, I was comforted in that security blanket of Mutual Assured Destruction. By fearing a real war, our leaders had motivation to seek peace. It seemed to work.
As time went on, "War" lost that terrible stigma. It's been used as a fear magnet for political agenda items that have nothing to do with national security. For those keeping track, we are engaged in several "wars" since the 1960.
The War on Poverty (1964, Johnson's State of Union Address)
The War on Cancer (1971, Nixon)
The War on Crime (J. Edgar Hoover, Mitchell...)
The War on Drugs (1973, establishment of Drug Enforcement Agency)
I've heard about the War on Christmas, but I don't expect to fall on a grenade for that one either. It seems to be a paranoid distraction by the most xenophobic in our country. I don't expect a holiday, which gives Federal employees a day off, is in any danger of going away. I just replaced my rotating artificial Tannenbaum last year.
The War on AIDS isn't as popular as it once was. I think the shock of people getting the disease has worn off, now that it isn't the instant death sentence it once was. It's still a problem, especially for those infected. But as one who doesn't have the opportunity or the interest in that sort of risky behavior, it's not likely that I'll get it.
If you have 93 minutes and want to a film about Hugo Chavez and Venezuela, you can see John Pilger's "The War on Democracy" . It's a very different view than what you'll see on American TV. If you consider "war" to be a progressive effort towards a goal, with a commitment of vast resources, than this war would fit that definition. Even then, the "war" moniker is a bit inflammatory.
The problem with wars on concepts is that there is no beginning and no end. Unlike with a conventional war, a concept is not an enemy, like a person or a state. You can't spell out terms of surrender. A war on a concept cannot be won. Instead, it fades from memory, once the election cycle is completed.
For this War on Terror, perhaps that's the best we can hope for. In January 2009 we will see the end of the George W. Bush administration. It will probably be replaced by that of Barack Obama or John McCain. Both of them have pledged to close the Guantamo Bay detention facility as the first step of reversing the civil right abuses of our current administration. Both have made careers listening to popular opinion when shaping their political positions. In this case, I'd rather have governance by popular opinion than by the wrong principles.
The Global War on Terror was not declared, but made real by an agreement of United Kingdom's Tony Blair and the United States' President Bush. The unpopularity of the War has led to Blair's resignation from his Labour Party, while Bush's approval rating (http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm) is regularly below 30%. A declaration of such a war would never get approved by the people's representatives today.
The War on Terror, like all wars on concepts, will end with a whimper. There will be no parades or speeches to our fallen heroes. Like the Vietnam War, the public will want to forget about this long and unprofitable venture. It will be the families of service members, who will have seen their loved ones returning with brain injuries and disfiguration, if at all, will have to inevitably ask "was this worth it?"
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 3 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of Bob Nightingale only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Bob Nightingale is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
