Goodbye War on Terrorism, Hello Long War

[Neil D]

By William M Arkin

One phrase contained in the draft Quadrennial Defense Review document circulating amongst defense experts is sure to be a part of your life for years to come: The long war.

Defense experts want the long war to be the new name for the war on terror, a kind of societal short hand that will stand shoulder to shoulder with the Cold War, promoted to capital letters, an indisputable and universally accepted state of the world.

"This generation of servicemembers will be in what we're calling the Long War," Army Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, assistant to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said earlier this week.

"Our estimate is that for at least the next 20 years … our focus will be … the extremist networks that will continue to threaten the United States and its allies."

Twenty years? Why not ten? Or forty?

On the surface, you might be thinking: wait a minute, if Arkin is questioning the duration of our conflict with terrorists, isn't he implicitly accepting the notion of a long war?

I'm questioning the ridiculous and baseless timeframe, and the characterization of the war on terrorism as either "winnable" or a war worthy of supplanting either the Cold War or World War II.

For those willing to read a 5 page article of interesting reading, check out The Long War

[:"blue"] It is begining to sound like various sources, of which I am quoting only one, that we are not only in for the long haul on gobal terrorism, but that we are also committing our children and children's children to it as well. Is this what you want? Do we need a military state to continue our goblal war on terror? [/]

[Bravus]

*cough*1984*cough*

[Neil D]

Quote:

---

Bravus said:

*cough*1984*cough*

---

What?!?!? You don't like your southern brothera to be at your door, eh Bravus?

[Nicodema]

Worse than the so-called "Cold War" of the 1950s which was basically "fought" only by the posturing threats of the arms race, THIS war is very real and visceral with real flesh (blown to bits) and real blood (lots of it spilled).

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If rich nasty heartless old men want to squabble with big guns and tanks, let them do the squabbling amongst themselves using THEIR bodies and kill one another. The world is better off without them, and most explicitly, so are all our children. No way on earth are any of my children going to have their lives taken from them for this foul filth and corruption. Those lives belong to themselves and to God, to spend as they decide between themselves and God, and if they are to lay them down, for a truly noble and worthy purpose, not this garbage fostered from the self-serving chimerae of the soulless.

[Dr. Shane]

The Cold War took over 40 years to win. The war on terror can be won but it will take many years and international cooperation.

[Neil D]

Nico....

Um, how do I say this so that it is pertenant.....?

I am aware that in Austrailia, all international phone calls and emails are scrutinized for certain wording so as to find and catch the 'bad guys'.....Since our goverment has now admited the same thing, I would imagine that these messages are being electronically scanned as well for certain words in Denver where the NSA is doing this sort of thing....

[jasd]

QR frame:

Everyone has seen this coming for years, ipso…, the 1984 mention. Well, y’all, it’s here an’ it’s gonna be here ‘til we’re peepin’ like a bird outa the dust of the earth. But it’s better we’re positioned the best we’s able than like that little missus asittin’ on her tuffet – all’s aready tah be frighted by a ugly critter. Them’s critters we’s gonna hafta be killin’ ain’t Shadrach, Meshack, and ‘Bednigo… they’s mean djinns comin’ to take out whole populations! that’s us-rhymes-with-bus, y’all. It’s gonna be

long, mean, and heart-breakingly nasty – and the most of us is gonna die from it. Better get used to it.

‘scuse, it’s my back and forth hangover e-mailin’ tah my cuz in TN.

A few words that the govt keys on in the cyber-ether: gun, food storage, survival, 375, 308, calibre, encrypt, Israel identity, British Israel, shelter, shortwave, Ham radio, CB, nightvision device, and on, and on, and on...; however, focusing on the govt as atagonist does not make the really bad guys who live only to kill Americans and Jews -- go away.

"That's life..." --Sinatra

[Nicodema]

Quote:

---

Shane said:

The war on terror can be won but it will take many years and international cooperation.

---

Shane, I do not believe any such thing as "the war on terror" can EVER be "won," at least, not by the use of weapons and warfare. It is rather like saying we will make war on WAR by fighting a war against it. Such a thing can never be won by weapons.

Terrorism can only be ended by universal human commitment to the principle that whatever our aims may be, we will not stoop to such methods to accomplish them. The fact remains that what we call "terrorism" is simply an extension on what we have heretofore merely termed "warfare." We call it "terrorism" when it is conducted by small cell groups, particularly those pushing an ideology, but do we not do the same things in the making of warfare and does not the pushing of an ideology form the backdrop if not the foundation of all warfare we make? Thus for terrorism to truly be ended once and for all, we must make all wars to cease unto the ends of the earth as well. For so long as we justify warfare, we justify terrorism by default and association.

[Nicodema]

Quote:

---

Neil D said:

...Since our goverment has now admited the same thing, I would imagine that these messages are being electronically scanned as well for certain words in Denver where the NSA is doing this sort of thing....

---

Let them. God is my Master. I answer to Him, and so must they, if they touch even one hair of my head. This is our Dress Rehearsal for the Beast after all -- if we shrink back now from speaking our minds on mere politics, what shall become of us in That Day when we must give an account of the reason for the hope that is within us?

"For if they do these things in the green tree, what shall be done in the dry?"

[Dr. Shane]

Typical warfare targets an opposing enemy's armed forces. Terrorism targets unarmed civilians. That is a major difference.

The war on terror can be won with the cooperation of other nations. When nations that harbor terrorists like Syria, Iran and the new Palastine state get on board with cracking down on terrorism, it will soon become less of a threat than drunk driving.

[Jeannieb43]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Shane said:

The war on terror can be won with the cooperation of other nations.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Unfortunately, the U.S. under the present administration is powerless to enlist the cooperation of other nations. Our foreign policy has been to tell all other countries they have to do things our way or not at all; they've chosen the "not at all," in most instances. We're not making progress in the war on terrorism. In fact, it appears that by our using lethal force on Iraq, where there was no Al Qaeda, the U.S. has opened the door to wider use of terrorism around the world.

[bevin]

Quote:

---

The Cold War took over 40 years to win

---

Who won?

Was the path chosen the best way to achieve the world we see around us?

/Bevin

[bevin]

Quote:

---

Typical warfare targets an opposing enemy's armed forces.

---

Yep, by bombing London, Coventry, Dresden, Tokyo, and Hiroshima.

Quote:

---

Terrorism targets unarmed civilians

---

Yep - like firing Hellfire missiles into family gatherings with women and children involved, holding the wive's of suspected insurgents hostage, and demolishing whole cities like Faluja.

Yep - by blocking the trade of entire nations, like Japan and Iraq.

Yep - by announcing that you will won't even work with a freely elected democratic Palestian government and will cut off aid because they got rid of the ineffective and corrupt government we liked, and replaced it with another.

/Bevin

[Nicodema]

Quote:

---

Shane said:

Typical warfare targets an opposing enemy's armed forces. Terrorism targets unarmed civilians. That is a major difference.

---

Agreed. However, when "typical warfare" crosses the line into detainment and torture of civilians deemed a threat to "security" -- and/or involves attacks on civilians like we saw in Vietnam and have seen in Iraq as well -- the lines are completely blurred. And when we consider that all armed forces come from the civilian population to begin with, the lines are blurred further still. The bottom line result is that the justification of war serves as the justification of terrorism. If we are going to let Murder and Destruction in the door for any reason whatsoever, we cannot expect them to behave as gentlemen at the table and only manifest themselves in a polite fashion within the predetermined boundaries of our justification's constraint. Our own armed forces have amply demonstrated their own lack of restraint even when they have (prisoners) completely helpless at their disposal -- just like the rest of the armed forces in the world have done throughout history.

Quote:

---

The war on terror can be won with the cooperation of other nations. When nations that harbor terrorists like Syria, Iran and the new Palastine state get on board with cracking down on terrorism, it will soon become less of a threat than drunk driving.

---

When "cracking down on terrorism" involves an indefinite suspension of civil liberties, is the cure really better than the disease? And have not the terrorists achieved their aims thereby? How long before religious liberties are lumped in with these civil liberties and we smell the breath of the Beast at the door? This has already happened to some degree with Muslims ... though of course some of us might dismiss that as trivial since it's not OUR holy book getting spat upon, urinated upon, or denied to OUR people.

Seriously, I think we ought to think this out again.

[Bravus]

Someone yesterday on a blog noted that the total number of Americans *ever* killed by Islamist terrorists (as opposed to the home-grown variety) is around 3500... and this is about the same number of people as suicide in the US *each month*. The question is asked whether this is a threat worth changing the whole internal and external structure of the country for. The riposte could be that terrorism might escalate, and it might, but it will likely never kill as many as suicide, or car accidents. As has been noted above, 'terror' is a concept or a tactic, not an army, and it's impossible to wage war on a concept. I briefly mentioned 1984 because it's a very carefully thought out example of what an eternal war allows a government to do domestically.

[Jeannieb43]

Yes. I picked up on your *cough* 1984 *cough* and thought it extremely apropos.

Our book club discussed Orwell's 1984 recently -- and found it amazingly similar to today's "Big Brother" concept of government in the U.S.

And now that we have a radical rightwing U.S.Supreme Court -- prophecy is being fulfilled before our very eyes.

I keep telling myself, This is what we've been praying for. ...Now, Lord, please give me strength to endure what's coming ahead.

[bevin]

Yep - ~45,000 motor vehicle deaths per year in the USA, and yet GWB is not organizing a war on motorists...

/Bevin

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

---

when "typical warfare" crosses the line into detainment and torture of civilians deemed a threat to "security" -- and/or involves attacks on civilians like we saw in Vietnam and have seen in Iraq as well

---

There are atrocities in all wars. This is one reason we try to avoid war. Yet these atrocities are the exception and not the rule. Those in the military found guilty of these are prosecuted.

The "torture" that has been so disputed is done by the CIA - not our military. Members of the military that torture prisoners are prosecuted.

[Dr. Shane]

I have thought about the number of people that die each year in drunk driving accidents as compared to terrorism too. It is a better comparison than just regular accidents because drunk driving accidents are completly avoidable and if more was done, less would happen.

The government is in a position to do something about both terrorism and drunk driving. The last statics I had were somewhere around 10,000 that die each year to drunk driving.

Wars are often caused by an attack.

Spanish-American War:

Quote:

---

After riots broke out in Havana, Cuba, in January 1898, the battleship U.S.S. Maine was sent there to safeguard American interests, although the Secretary of the Navy, John D. Long, insisted that it was only making a friendly call. A mysterious explosion destroyed the Maine on February 15, 1898, while in the Havana Harbor. Although the cause of the explosion was unknown, the American public soon became consumed with "war fever," blaming the Spanish in Cuba for the attack.

---

Russo-Japan War

Quote:

---

Near the then strategic ice-free Russian port of Port Arthur, Admiral Heihachiro Togo commanded the Japanese fleet... The Japanese ships concentrated their heavier fire on the batteries, while lobbing six and eight inch shells at the Russian ships. However, after about thirty minutes of inconclusive fighting, Togo, with his First Fleet decided to make a highly dangerous move: he turned his ships around and retreated, in full range of the artillery and Russian ships.

---

WW1 (American involvement)

Quote:

---

The Lusitania carryied 1,198 people, of which 128 were Americans, was torpedoed by a German U-Boat on May 7th, 1915. Wilson informed the German government that he was ready to break off diplomatic relations if the bombing of passenger ships did not cease. Unwilling to risk war with the United States, Germany stopped the bombing of those ships, but continued to attack ships that were clearly involved in military activities.

---

WW2 (American Involvement)

Quote:

---

Nagumo's task force sailed from the Kuriles on 26 November and arrived, undetected by the Americans, at a point about 200 miles north of Oahu at 0600 hours (Hawaiian time) on December 7, 1941. Beginning at 0600 and ending at 0715, a total of some 360 planes were launched in three waves. These planes rendezvoused to the south and then flew toward Oahu for coordinated attacks.

|

In Pearl Harbor were 96 vessels, the bulk of the United States Pacific Fleet. Eight battleships of the Fleet were there, but the aircraft carriers were all at sea. The Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet (CINCPAC) was Admiral Husband E. Kimmel. Army forces in Hawaii, including the 24th and 25th Infantry Divisions, were under the command of Lt. Gen. Walter C. Short, Commanding General of the Hawaiian Department. On the several airfields were a total of about 390 Navy and Army planes of all types, of which less than 300 were available for combat or observation purposes.

---

9/11 was a simular attack to these listed above. So it is typical or "normal" for such an attack to cause a war. That doesn't mean it makes sense. 9/11 did cause a lot more property damage than is caused by drunk drivers.

It certainly is an interesting comparison. I think war has a lot to do with politics and pride. When a nation is attacked, its people want the government to do something and often times that means war. Now the stakes are much higher as terrorists can strike us without us knowing where they are coming from and eventually will aquire nuclear and chemical weapons. Once a nuclear device goes off in a major city and kills 1 million people we will no longer be able to compare terrorism to drunk driving.

[Nicodema]

Quote:

---

bevin said:

Yep - ~45,000 motor vehicle deaths per year in the USA, and yet GWB is not organizing a war on motorists...

---

Sir, I perceive that you OBVIOUSLY have not been to the MVA lately!!

- Nico, who was just there today.