Quick obvious question: Should the "War on Terror" be called the "War on

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

a few Nuts?"

We are going after the equivalent of the James Jones or Koresh debacles,,, NOT an organized army from any organized gov't/

Ant thoughts here?

[tuvor]

1. Who's actually on the receiving end of the war on terror?

There was no terror in Iraq, so Iraqis are actually on the receiving end of bush's War of Choice.

So...Who's the enemy in the war on terror? And are they getting blowed up real good?

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

2. Who the fuck is "terror?"

[mike_c]

3. there is no war on terror except as a marketing strategy...

...for American imperialism and corrupt foreign policy. Call it the war on poor people, or perpetual war for perpetual profit. "War on terror" makes it sound noble. It's a sham, a rip off, and international bullying all rolled into one big lie.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

4. You're spot on... We need to keep screaming theis as loud as we can...

Terror is no country, no individual... Just a concept.

[demgrrrll]

5. I think Gore Vidal nailed it when he said you cannot have a war on

an abstract noun. He compared the phrase to having a war on dandruff and said that the phrase had no meaning.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

7. Dammit! And I thought I was the only one to read Vidal here...

JK

[two gun sid]

6. Terrorism is a strategy...

you can't go to war with it.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

8. Or Terrorism is a catch-phrase... A marketing device.

[two gun sid]

10. You are right. Terrorism is what is used to sell the American...

people chimps worn-out and tired foriegn policy. The way the PNACer's use it, all the rubes know what they really mean is non-whites, Arabs, and Muslims.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

11. Sad and true....

Why is it so few recognise it?

http://www.ieasysite.com/blinddillorecords/blind-dillo_records_004.htm

[Stirk]

9. If the Bush Administration actually wanted to decrease terrorism,

they'd have done the exact opposite of everything they've done.

They would've increased international cooperation, particularly in law enforcement, and they would've put a major effort into fighting global poverty. They would applaud governments that listen their people, like those in France and Germany, and they would refuse to deal with governments which do not, like Musharaf's Pakistani regime.

There is no "war on terrorism". It's a simple slogan for idiots to chant as corporatists use the country's reputation and resources to get alot richer (at the expense of the chanting idiots).

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

14. Spot on. Why do so few people see this? Why does the media

play stupid in this subject?

[followthemoney]

12. war is terrorism, so the war on war is terrorism on terrorism

Tit for Tat, until we are even steven. Too bad for the humans who get in the way.

[satya]

13. I just call it *'s illegal and immoral occupation of innocent countries.nt

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Disturbed]

16. The Lamestream Media is complicit in...

the resources grab of the U.S./UK Capitalists. This is where most of the
terror stems from.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

17. Why don't you know that talk like that isn't consistant with the current

wishes of this administration? Let's just ignore that for now. (See Phillippines)

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/11324045.htm