Whatever did happen to the phrase 'War on Terror' and why aren't BUSHCO using it anymore?
964401
well, maybe Bu$hCo has clued in that the American public is cluing that you can't make war on a tactic.
846022
Good news if true. The people in the military not on a neocon string have been asking for it for years.\n\nRummy is part of the American axis* of evil.\n\n*Should be a different word, descriptive of beasts with long ears that go "hee-haw", but some airhead would complain that it was invective, that being the only use of the word they are familiar with.
988922
Congress did not declare "War on Terror." The term is used only in rhetoric and originated from the executive branch.\nSince this isn't a formal war, it may not have a formal end time and may be used as an excuse for encroaching on civil liberties for many administrations to come if the American people are not careful.
810012
Neo-con comes from Neoconservative which was and is a political movement in the United States.  It started in the 1960's.  It can be likened to the 1950's New Conservatism movement and to the 1920's New Era campaign.  Neoconservatism has come back to life through the Regan years and GWB's administration.  People say the movement is dead but the ideology of neoconservatism is very much alive.  In fact today neocon is usually used to describe a member of the Republican Party.  One view that can be applied to what is happening today is they tend to believe in aggressive foreign policy and usually move forward despite what the rest of the world thinks.  And they do it all in the name of homeland security.  Even though there are more terrorists as a result of our actions in Iraq than there were on 9/11.  Basically the Neocons that benefitted from this war are Cheney and his Halliburton cronies, the Bush's and Bin Laden's, and anyone else in his cabinet.  Foreign and domestic business organizations alike are profitting greatly from this war.
1153959
Um, yeah.  You're right all the way.  We left the job half finished and ran off to start another war we didn't need to.  Now Osama is still out there, terrorists have a new breeding ground in the chaotic Iraq, and druglords and the Taliban are resurfacing in Afghanistan.  I wish I had a better answer for you.
568024
"...this war.." I am assuming you mean the war on terrorism that was declared in 2001. The last war that was declared was in 1991. Let me recall my CNN video clips since 2001, terrorist in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Afghanistan, Philippians, United States and many numerous other countries have been disarmed or dismembered. By finishing the job in 1991 like we should have been allowed to do, these terrorist would still have been in other countries, including our own.
266896
I don’t understand.  In the 90s, CNN reported that weapons inspectors were being locked out of compounds for hours, then trucks would leave the back exit.  They were also being denied paperwork that they wanted to see.  They were getting frustrated and throwing their hands up.  Meantime, nobody followed any of the trucks, found out where they were going, or what was on them.  Then, like magic, the WMDs vanished like a fart in the wind.  Now, Bush is being called a bad guy, and the war is being called illegal, even though the UN resolved that action should be taken if Saddam did not cooperate.  When it came to the time to do something, China, Germany, France, and North Korea (was anybody actually surprised here) used their muscle against U.S. taking action.  Meantime, what were all those planes doing violating the U.N. no-fly zone, where were they going, and what was on them?\n\nGore testified in 2004 to the 9/11 Commission that the Clinton administration attack on Sudan al Shifa plant in 1998 was a valid attack based on a verified US threat.  Saddam Hussein had his chemical weapons chief help Shifa in its VX nerve gas research based on Saddam’s own unique brand of VX nerve agent, that contained the chemical EMPTA, unlike any other VS elsewhere.  Bin Laden had funded the al Shifa plant and EMPTA was found on its soil.  Obviously there was a WMD alliance between al Qaida and Saddam, or at least according to Gore.\n\nNow, the real story: If a democratic president was waging the war, democrats would be all for the war, and republicans would be calling it an illegal war.  That Moore guy would be doing “documentaries” (haha) about how bad Saddam was instead of how bad Bush is.  Meanwhile, these message boards are full of partisan hate, most of which has nothing to do with mainstream American feelings, which is usually guided by the press (sadly enough).\n\nOne more thing—with the mass graves, electrocution chambers in police stations, children being executed in front of parents who did not cooperate with the regime, dumping nerve gas on civilian populations, a population at large too frightened to speak out against the government, etc, etc, etc, I don’t understand why anybody thinks Saddam should have been just left in power.  Oh, negotiations????  Saddam jerked around the U.N. for 10 years after signing agreements.  If you say the WMD thing was a big bluff, then we can assume it was another Saddam game, he wanted war, and he thought he could win.
762035
Finally, someone who's been reading the de-classified documents besides me.  Bush Sr. was the best drug dealer, EVER.  His CIA ran the Drugs from which airport...Mena, Ark.  Who was governor?  Yup, Clinton!!!!  People WAKE UP.  Bush and Clinton have been in bed since the early 80's.\n\nDude, the War on Drugs enabled the USG to DOUBLE DIP.  Just like today:  under the Taliban, growing poppies in Afghan was a death sentence.  Now, under US/Afghan rule, Afghanistan has regained its spot as #1 poppy producing country.  HELLO!!!\n\nThe Afghan War was never funded by America until the Iraq war began...why...because we teamed with poppy producers to share the wealth..billions, while the USG kept billions to FIGHT the very drugs used to finance the downfall of the Taliban.  Granted, this is my own interpretation of the data...and I will not be proven correct or incorrect until the documents are declassified, in about 40 years, but, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and talks like a duck, then you bet ur azz, its a duck.\n\nP.S.  The Savings and Loan scandal of the 80's was also a cover up...but you need to find that out for yourselves.
805606
LOL\n;-)\n\nAh if it weren't for "Bushisms" I might not have laughed at all during the last 6 years!\n\nThis is one of many verbal gaffs and mental blunders produced by the George the Wunderkind.  There are so many more that betray his true attitudes (and his Momma's)  toward his fellow Americans.  She can't dirty her beautiful mind with thoughts of dead soldiers and he never stops thinking of ways to harm Americans - Freudian slip or not, it is still very telling.
1176675
I don't know, as I haven't read the book of fiction upon which your question is founded. War on terror? If you are referencing Iraq, you are stupid. But no matter. The war is good for the country in the long run. Sends stupid angry white men, the backbone of the Republican party, to early retirement from voting. Supporting the war is treasonous, knowing what we now know. Shame on the spineless and soulless misanthropes in charge of our affairs
640116
Having a war on "terror" is like having a war on vegans or a war on alcoholics. The principal of which is an impossible goal. You cannot wipe out and idea or a way of life that someone chooses. It would be like declaring war on protesters....the problem with this act is that it will breed more enemies just by the audacity of mindset behind it. The main result of this "war on the boogieman" is the use of fear to exploit an entire nation into submitting their powers (such as civil liberties and our VERY damaged image with the rest of the world) to some shadow government who works entirely in secrecy and has us checking under our beds before we turn out the lights. WE the People need to WAKE UP and take back what "they" are stealing from us: Our Liberty.
903715
Nothing to do with 9-11. The Bushies wanted to add power to the presidency. The easiest way to do that is to go to war somewhere. The whole thing was decided even before Bush was elected. Drum up a war with Iraq so he could be a "War President," and thus get the extra juice in constitutional powers...and get an extra bump as an incumbent pres, since most all wartime presidents are reelected.
965779
It's a GREAT day brother!! Yes common sense has finally prevailed, it will take a while to clean up the mess that BUSHCO has perpetrated on our great country, I'm just waiting for the investigations against Duhbya's criminal activities to begin.\n\nhttp://www.brainshrub.com/blogmedia/bush-jail_bars-war_criminal.jpg
530756
Our disgusting "President" admitted in early 2002 that the "Secret Government" their words not mine, was activated shortly after the attacks the September.  It was a story that made the news and then was gone.\n\nYou are definitely smoking something if you think these fascists will change into a huge farming Co-Op and grow food for the starving Africans...
1155408
People seem to have forgotten how the Taliban and rebels in Afganistan whipped the butts of the Russians when they tried to capture Afganista. The United states helped the Afganis with intel and arms, and Russia still lost. Bin laden was involved then, we supported him and his fight against the Russians. Bush policies had nothing to do with 9/11, that was a result of failed policies and promises made by Carter and his administration. It just happens that Bush was on duty when Bin laden put his plan into action. It's all about oil. It has always been about oil. Chasing down zarqawi is more for the press and to show the people back home that progress is being made in Iraq. We don't know what is really going on off camera. Zarqawi was self appoined to lead al-quida in Iraq. There have been reports that binladen didn't like him pitting shiites against sunnis and killing other muslims. The question still remains, should we be in iraq? It doesn't matter now, we are there, we need to send more troops, clean up that place and  get out. Then send our Iraq troops to Afganistan, and clean house there also, then build that darn pipeline.
881526
It has created an eruption of hate and hostility from the "left", more than ever, because they dont understand the concept of the War.  They think that its all we need to do is stop what we are doing, come home, and act like the War never happened..... And just hope the terrorists will leave us alone....  Isnt that how Bill Clinton addressed the problem with Bin Laden back in 1993..... Yes!\n\nThey seem to think if ya ignore it, itll go away... and that wont happen........Wake up and smell the coffee, people!
1167834
Both the Cold War and the War on Terror are open-ended wars with no clear enemy.  This allows the U.S. Government to use it to go against elements it deems dangerous...all it had to do back in the 50s was label those elements "communists"...now it labels them "terrorists"