Obama Administration Declares Victory In War On Semantics


Welcome to the world of jabberwocky.

US no longer at war with ‘terrorism’, says top official

The US is no longer engaged in a “war on terrorism”; neither is it fighting “jihadists” nor locked in a “global war” as the Obama
administration’s top homeland security and counterterrorism official has called the terms coined by the Bush administration as unacceptable.

It is now solely a “war with Al Qaeda” and its violent extremist allies, John Brennan, who heads the White House homeland security office, said during a speech on Thursday at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank.

The Washington Times reported Friday that the “semantic shift” is intended to bring precision to the way the president and his aides talk about the nation’s efforts to defeat Al Qaeda, though Bush administration officials point out that there is no dramatic change in the policies.

According to Brennan, to say the US is fighting “jihadists” is wrong because it is using “a legitimate term, ‘jihad’, meaning to purify oneself or to wage a holy struggle for a moral goal”, which “risks giving these murderers the religious legitimacy they desperately seek but in no way deserve.”

“Worse, it risks reinforcing the idea that the United States is somehow at war with Islam itself,” Brennan was quoted as saying.

He said the administration will not use the phrase ‘war on terrorism’ “because terrorism is but a tactic – a means to an end, which in Al Qaeda’s case is global domination by an Islamic caliphate.”

He also dismissed “global war” as a term that feeds the terror network’s vision of itself as a “a highly organized, global entity capable of replacing sovereign nations with a global caliphate.”

See also:
No More War on Terror, White House Claims
Barack Obama adviser rejects ‘global war on terror’
Obama’s Battle Against Terrorism To Go Beyond Bombs and Bullets
Obama’s counter-terrorism advisor denounces Bush-era policies
The ‘Obama doctrine’ on national security begins to emerge
Political Punch Podcast: White House Counterterrorism Czar John Brennan
Administration Dumps ‘Jihadist’ Term
War By Euphemism

So, let me get this straight, we’re NOT at war with terrorism or jihadis, we ARE “solely at war with Al Qaeda.” Um, then why, exactly, do we have 60,000 troops engaged with the TALIBAN?

You know, I’m sure glad that the pinhead morons in Washington have gotten all their politically correct, semantic terminology bull[expletive deleted] squared away. Whatever the [expletive deleted] they think they’re trying to accomplish, it’d be a damn shame to refer to it incorrectly.

/I’m sure the troops fighting and dying every day in Afghanistan really appreciate the newly clarified nuance in the definition of what they’re doing

4 Responses

  1. We’re out of there within two years, win, lose, or draw, according to David Kilcullen.

    That newly clarified nuance is the only strategic direction the troops have gotten from their CinC since election day. Tough to win anything if you don’t know what the victory conditions are.

    It’s gonna be really tough to re-create Operations Eagle Pull/Frequent wind for 60,000+ in Kabul 2011. Never mind the equipment…

    NIGHT OF
    THE
    HELICOPTERS,
    R

  2. […] See also: Obama administration removing terms like ‘Islamic extremism’ from national security document World must not ignore terrorism’s religious aspect Will White House Tone Down Terror Terminology? Obama moves to de-link terrorism from Islam Obama talks less of terror in outreach to Muslims Mush From the Wimp: Obama, Orwell and National-Security Psychobabble War By Euphemism Obama Administration Declares Victory In War On Semantics […]

  3. […] roots Lawmakers, Officials Question How Faisal Shahzad Managed to Board a Plane War By Euphemism Obama Administration Declares Victory In War On Semantics Domestic Contingency Operation National Security Policy In […]

  4. /I’m sure the troops fighting and dying every day in Afghanistan really appreciate the newly clarified nuance in the definition of what they’re doing

    This nuance isn’t new-it is already apparent on the ROE’s this Administration has hancuffed our troops with. Our current losses have been multiplied by those ROE’s, and by not allowing our bases there to be properly defended (Afghan Govt. demanded we remove our watch towers, etc., etc., etc.).

Leave a Reply to render64 Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: