Command of NATO Forces in Afghanistan....

dekhqonbacha

dekhqonbacha

...


My point is...its called the war on terror because thats what it is... its stupid to say its not.

The USA was attacked by Al Quada, not terrorism. Terrorism was the tactic used, but Al Quada was the actual group of persons who attacked the USA.
...
Terrorism is a tactic. Al Quada is a tangible enemy.
Bush declared a war on a tactic.
....
By definition, a war on a tactic can never end. It will always exist because the tactic always exists.
...
Yes, a war on terror is a strange thing. Despots have used it for their own purposes…calling political dissidents terrorists and enacting their own oppressive versions of the “patriot act”. It was used as a reason to invade Iraq, and is referred often during talk of Iran. It seems to permeate everything in the world now, which seems ludicrous in light of such things as Aids and Global Warming. It’s going in the wrong direction, coloring the way other realities are seen to the point of blurring them.
I hope America finds some clarity and definition for it’s foreign policy soon. I think the political slate needs cleaning and some new definitions and priorities need to be floated. One man has decided how the world should be viewed for too long, and in spite of declared good intentions this world view nurtures fear and anger, and that’s no way for Americans to live their lives.

Terror is a pronounced state of fear, an overwhelming sense of imminent danger.

Terrorism refers to a strategy of using violence, social threats, or coordinated attacks, in order to generate fear, cause disruption, and ultimately, bring about compliance with specified political, religious, or ideological demands.

The very phrase "War on Terrorism" is the subject of debate and disagreement. First, there has always been considerable debate as to what constitutes terrorism. Under some definitions, all military action is terrorism, and thus some contend that it is impossible to wage a "War on Terror". In addition, the notion of declaring war on an abstract concept is troubling to some (in the same vein as the war to end all wars, War on Drugs, War on Poverty, and the War on Crime). The "War on Terrorism", like the War on Drugs, involves a mix of military and non-military forces.

Among those who accept the term "War on Terrorism" there are disagreements as to what actions and by what states, should be considered as part of the "war." For example, the Bush administration, despite considerable international and domestic disagreement, contends that the pre-emptive 2003 invasion of Iraq and the subsequent occupation is a crucial part of the "War on Terrorism". Likewise, Russia has recently asserted that its ongoing struggles with Chechen rebels should be part of the international effort.

Only two months after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Noam Chomsky, on the extreme left end of the debate, argued that the United States is a leading terrorist state.

The phrase "War on Terrorism" was first widely used by the Western press to refer to the attempts by Russian and European governments, and eventually the U.S. government, to stop attacks by anarchists against international political leaders.

The next time the phrase gained currency was its use to describe the efforts by the British colonial government to end a spate of Jewish terrorist attacks in the British Mandate of Palestine in the late 1940s. The British proclaimed a "War on Terrorism" and attempted to crack down on Irgun, Lehi, and anyone perceived to be cooperating with them. The Jewish attacks, Arab reprisals, and the subsequent British crackdown hastened the British evacuation from Palestine.

Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated. Bush.

Analysts say the incidents show that not only are there no front lines in the "war on terror" but that there is no single war against it because there are few common causes, no common enemy and no common strategy for fighting one.

Others note that "terrorism" is not an enemy, but rather a tactic; calling it a "War on Terror," they say, obscures the differences between, for example, anti-occupation insurgents and international jihadists.

EastSideScotian

Terrorism refers to a strategy of using violence, social threats, or coordinated attacks, in order to generate fear, cause disruption, and ultimately, bring about compliance with specified political, religious, or ideological demands.

BitWhys

Jersay

dekhqonbacha

We are fighting the people responsiable for useing this Strategy....Called terrorists...

Hence the War on terror.

I still dont see why you guys have to be over critical of the phrase, because in general it amkes complete sense.

EastSideScotian

No, we are not fighting terrorism. We are fighting Afghans.

Mogz

No, we are not fighting terrorism. We are fighting Afghans.