Nobody has ever explained how you can declare war on an adjective. Bliar has been gone 2 weeks and already the British have stopped using it. I think we'll decide that it was just another stupid thing Bush used to say a lot, and be done with it.
2007-07-13 03:00:12 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
war on drugs, war on poverty.....
those "wars" are still being waged. and failing just as miserably.
this one will be here for a long, long time.
2007-07-13 03:04:58 · answer #1 · answered by daddio 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The question is not whether a phrase will disappear. That is unimportant. Bush will have had to contend with terrorism for almost all his term. But whether of not terrorist threats will disappear.
No sooner was Blair gone than there was a plot to blow something up in GB. Terrorists are not just going to go away because the words are changed.
It does seem somewhat odd folks like you are such sticklers for correctness when it comes to a "War on Terror", yet you are so free to redefine other terms to suit your purposes. Why is that?
2007-07-13 03:42:56 · answer #2 · answered by namsaev 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I see. If we only get rid of the phrase, everything will be fine. If America brings its troops home and stops all this war stuff the world will be a better place.
The British have stopped using the phrase and all the terrorists left England, right?
If people like you ever succeed, we had all better start brushing up on our Arabic.
.
2007-07-13 03:35:58 · answer #3 · answered by Jacob W 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It can't just disappear. The President of the USA asked congress to declare a war on terror, and congress did so. It's a declared war. Active duty armed forces personnel get a service ribbon, which makes them veterans of a foreign war.
The term can't just go away. The war has to be declared over by congress.
2007-07-13 03:09:01 · answer #4 · answered by Overt Operative 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Iraq became "wrapped up". Bush signed the status of stress settlement and rather not something has replaced through fact then. Then President Dumbass went to Afghanistan and destabilized it by making use of attempting to overturn a loose and honest election purely through fact he needed his own say in the way it grew to become out. To make concerns worse, two times he has delivered good information to the Taliban by making use of publicizing his 0.5-assed surge in 2009 and by making use of giving a time table for removing troops. for this reason you by no skill % democrats.
2016-12-14 07:36:11 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
So, what would you suggest...War on Angry People?
Please don't point to the UK as being a government that has a handle on terrorism. They have had a number of attacks and their only solution is to soften the dialogue...like somehow if we don't call it terrorism, it becomes something else. That's "head in the sand" thinking.
2007-07-13 03:29:03 · answer #6 · answered by kathy_is_a_nurse 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The "War on Terror" will become a noun after Bush leaves office.
2007-07-13 03:05:23 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
I see, so you think there is no war on terror!...hmmm i'm sure madrid, the uk..indonesia...and other parts of the world might think it is global...so in your mind, if we stop saying "war on terror' the attacks will just automatically go away??/...if so, you are quite delusional.
2007-07-13 03:06:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Are you saying that terrorism is a myth that Mr. Bush dreamed up? Talk about about a freaking lunatic fringe question..........they are out there, they are real and they're no doubt gunning for us!
2007-07-13 03:09:19 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
The "war on terror" phrase will not disappear until every muslim is dead.
2007-07-13 03:06:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋