English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

We all know that Terror is a concept, right? An emotion, generated in different people by different stimuli. That being so, how can you have a war on it? Some people are terrified of heights - will we only win the war on terror once everywhere's flattened? Some people, bless 'em, are terrified of buttons. Are we looking at mandatory zippers before the war on terror can be said to be won?

2007-08-22 00:47:44 · 5 answers · asked by mdfalco71 6 in Politics & Government Politics

lol It's a fair cop Spacephantom; I grant you this is a comedic use of semantics to make a point. But my point really is that because of our culture of sound-bite politics, they're able to use the phrase to justifry practically anything without genuine scrutiny of the impact of theis measures. As long as it helps "the war on terror", they infer it's unpatriotic of us to question any action they take. Hence my use of the ludicrous examples of heights and buttons ;o)

2007-08-22 02:07:30 · update #1

5 answers

I have absolutely no "faith" in "our leaders" whatsoever. None. Not one speck. What has happened to this country since 2000 has sucked every molecule of idealism and faith out of me.

What is left is bitter realization that our "leaders" have ONE and I do mean ONE purpose in life:

TO GET RE-ELECTED.

To be a part of Government, with the cushy hours, the obscene pay scale, the guaranteed pay raises, the best medical coverage IN THE WORLD, a disgustingly generous pension, and absolute guarantee of solid income AFTER "serving" by way of writing their own best-seller, speaking engagements, consulting positions, becoming LOBBYISTS, various other jobs with Big Business.

Everybody knows this.

And yet - WHAT are we doing about it?

2007-08-22 01:59:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Very good question.
But you can win a war on terrorism, if you keep expanding the definition of terrorist, and continue to paint with a broader brush when using the term "terrorist". once everyone falls into neat little categories of we or them, the government wins by virtue of intent, not mission.
But then you have to ask yourself, what the intent is when someone wants to make the provisions of an easily abused bill, permanent, while lacking meaningful oversight.

2007-08-22 01:08:54 · answer #2 · answered by avail_skillz 7 · 4 1

Naughty Falco - using semantics to twist the meaning of the phrase ;-)

The so called "War on Terror" actually means the war on those who commit terrorist acts in the name of Islamic fundamentalism. "War on Terror" is a bit more catchy though, you have to admit.

If the politicians used more accurate phraseology to describe what they actually meant, the media would probably have ignored it because it wouldn't have been a catchy enough sound bite.

Edit: yes - have to say I agree completely with your points in additional details.

2007-08-22 02:03:01 · answer #3 · answered by Spacephantom 7 · 2 2

Thank you for stating the obvious. you can't kill an idea or control people's thoughts.
And the more guns you use to try, the more the problem compounds.

2007-08-22 00:54:37 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

You can kill the little bung-holes doing it if you let the military do their job.

2007-08-22 00:58:06 · answer #5 · answered by The prophet of DOOM 5 · 0 3

fedest.com, questions and answers