Hey, Bush, who's our enemy today?
Harry Hope
December 22, 2006
Bush's 'Global War on Radicals'
by Robert Parry
The United States will never win the "war on terror," in part, because
George W. Bush keeps applying elastic definitions to the enemy, most
recently expanding the conflict into a war against Muslim "radicals
and extremists."
With almost no notice in Official Washington, Bush has inserted this
new standard for judging who's an enemy as he lays the groundwork for
a wider conflict in the Middle East and a potentially endless world
war against many of the planet's one billion adherents to Islam.
Indeed, it could be argued that the "war on terror" has now morphed
into the "war on radicals," allowing Bush to add the likes of Iraqi
Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr and the leaders of Syria and Iran to his
lengthening international enemies list.
Bush's twists and turns in defining the enemy in the "war on terror"
started more than five years ago, in the days immediately after the
9/11 attacks.
Amid the nation's anguish, Bush spoke in grandiloquent and
quasi-religious terms, vowing to "rid the world of evil," a patently
absurd task that never received the ridicule it deserved.
But Bush then settled on a more practical aim, defeating "terrorist
groups of global reach."
Though that formulation still presented some problems of definition –
what does "global reach" exactly mean? – at least it offered
measurable terms.
A "terrorist," by definition, is someone who commits violent acts
against civilians to achieve a political goal.
"Global reach" narrowed the enemy even more by excluding local forces
that attacked civilians from the same country or a nearby region.
These parameters made sense because they spared the U.S. military from
intervening in every local struggle where some rebel or paramilitary
force may have committed an atrocity, but one that didn't threaten
U.S. national interests.
The United States also was freed from having to pick sides in
conflicts where both sides accuse the other of "terrorism."
In other words, Bush's early goal of defeating "terrorist groups of
global reach" was narrow enough to be achievable.
The war, in effect, targeted al-Qaeda and similar organizations that
not only embraced terrorism as a tactic but had the capability to
reach across international boundaries to inflict civilian casualties,
like the 9/11 attacks.
Bush also added to his hit list governments, like the Taliban in
Afghanistan, that harbored these terrorist groups.
However, after the quick U.S. victory over the Taliban in winter
2001-02, Bush shifted the war's focus in two important ways:
First, the war against "terrorist groups of global reach" transformed
into the "global war on terrorism," an important distinction.
Suddenly, U.S. Special Forces were not responsible for just defeating
al-Qaeda and a few other groups with global ambitions but were instead
waging a global war against a variety of terrorist groups that
presented threats mostly to local authorities.
Some were "home-grown terrorists" with no links to al-Qaeda or other
international organizations.
Second, Bush decided to settle some old scores with Iraqi dictator
Saddam Hussein, who was despised by Bush's neoconservative advisers
who dreamt of remaking the Middle East into a land of passive Arabs
who would take direction from Washington and accept peace terms from
Tel Aviv.
So Arabs wouldn't think this was all about them, Bush coined the
phrase "axis of evil" that lumped together Iraq, Iran and North Korea.
To further meld Bush's "war on terror" with the invasion of Iraq, the
Bush administration also hyped and fabricated evidence to link the
secular Hussein to Islamic terrorists allied with al-Qaeda's Osama bin
Laden, though in reality the two were bitter enemies.
Insurgency or Terror?
Since 2003, after the U.S.-led invasion toppled Hussein and an Iraqi
insurgency emerged to fight the occupying army, the U.S. news media
has lent a hand in blurring the American public's distinctions between
the Iraq War and the "war on terror."
Iraqi insurgent attacks on U.S. soldiers, especially the deadly
roadside bombs, often were described as "terrorist" incidents by the
American news media, though the attacks didn't fit the classic
definition of "terrorism."
Just recently, as I was listening to my car radio, a CNN newscast came
on to report that an American soldier had been killed in Iraq by a
"terrorist sniper."
By definition, however, the shooting of a soldier occupying a foreign
country – though horrible on a human level – is not an act of
"terrorism," since no civilians are involved.
Yet, in the sloppy vernacular of the U.S. press corps, the word
"terrorism" came to mean any violent act that officials in Washington
didn't like, a kind of geopolitical curse word.
CNN and other U.S. news outlets apparently understood they would pay
no price for pandering to what they took to be the "pro-American"
attitude.
By waving the loaded word "terrorism" around, however, the U.S. news
media helped the Bush administration misrepresent the threat facing
U.S. troops in Iraq and elsewhere.
Now, Bush is broadening the war's parameters yet again, depicting the
goal of his Middle East policy as defeating "radicals and extremists,"
categories that are even more elastic than the word "terrorist."
At a joint news conference with British Prime Minister Tony Blair on
Dec. 7, Bush said, "I believe we're in an ideological struggle between
forces that are reasonable and want to live in peace, and radicals and
extremists."
Bush has repeated this formulation in other recent public appearances,
including at his news conference of Dec. 20 when he portrayed the
fight against "radicals and extremists" as a long-term test of
American manhood.
He vowed to show them "they can't run us out of the Middle East, that
they can't intimidate America."
In other words, the war against "terrorist groups of global reach,"
which became the "global war on terrorism," now has morphed into what
might be called the "global war on radicals and extremists," a
dramatic escalation of the war's ambitions with nary a comment from
the U.S. news media.
So, under Bush's new war framework, the enemy doesn't necessarily have
to commit or plot acts of international terrorism or even local acts
of terrorism.
It only matters that Bush judges the person to be a "radical" or an
"extremist."
While the word "terrorism" is open to abuse – under the old adage "one
man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" – the definition of
"radical" or "extremist" is even looser.
It all depends on your point of view.
_____________________________________________________
The "enemy" is whoever Georgie Bush wants him to be.
Harry
PerfectlyAble
> http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_rob_kall_061222_bush_s__global_war_o.htm
>
>
> The "enemy" is whoever Georgie Bush wants him to be.
Actually thats not true. The "enemy" is whoever the mainstream
media will overlook Bush demonising to stay on the offensive.
Atleast half of all advertising revenues is targetted at anti-Bush
people so they can't accept everything Bush says, but try.
Amy Likes Pot!
> http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_rob_kall_061222_bush_s__global_wa
So, is it Eurasia or East Asia? Who ever it is we have always been at war
with them. (Sorry, I just finished re-reading 1984)
gaffo
> http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_rob_kall_061222_bush_s__global
so he basically declaired war on 2-billion muslims.
no news here - been a crusade for 3 yrs now.
--
mgke...@yahoo.com
> http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_rob_kall_061222_bush_s__global_war_o.htm
>
> December 22, 2006
>
> Bush's 'Global War on Radicals'
>
> by Robert Parry
>
>
> The United States will never win the "war on terror," in part, because
> George W. Bush keeps applying elastic definitions to the enemy, most
> recently expanding the conflict into a war against Muslim "radicals
> and extremists."
>
> With almost no notice in Official Washington, Bush has inserted this
> new standard for judging who's an enemy as he lays the groundwork for
> a wider conflict in the Middle East and a potentially endless world
> war against many of the planet's one billion adherents to Islam.
>
> Indeed, it could be argued that the "war on terror" has now morphed
> into the "war on radicals," allowing Bush to add the likes of Iraqi
> Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr and the leaders of Syria and Iran to his
> lengthening international enemies list.
If Bush wants to kill religious extremists, we have plenty of them
right here in the good-ole USA. Some of them even hold high positions
in our government. What we ought to do is have some congressional
hearings and start right off with the following question:
"Have you now or have you ever been a member of a religious extremist
group?"
Then if they say yes, we could shoot their ass.
Fredric L. Rice
>A "terrorist," by definition, is someone who commits violent acts
>against civilians to achieve a political goal.
The Bush terrorists have redefined the term to also include simple
crimes as "terrorism" -- such as vandalism, arson, and freeing animals
from cages as well as picketing and protesting against human rights
abuses, vivisection, and so many other lawful acts.
The Bush terrorists are our only enemies.
---
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2998511003310284029&q=the+bridge
Movie about what it's like inside Scientology. Get before the
Scientology crime syndicate has its criminal lawyers remove it.
mgke...@yahoo.com
> http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_rob_kall_061222_bush_s__global_war_o.htm
>
> December 22, 2006
>
> Bush's 'Global War on Radicals'
>
> by Robert Parry
>
>
> The United States will never win the "war on terror," in part, because
> George W. Bush keeps applying elastic definitions to the enemy, most
> recently expanding the conflict into a war against Muslim "radicals
> and extremists."
>
> With almost no notice in Official Washington, Bush has inserted this
> new standard for judging who's an enemy as he lays the groundwork for
> a wider conflict in the Middle East and a potentially endless world
> war against many of the planet's one billion adherents to Islam.
>
> Indeed, it could be argued that the "war on terror" has now morphed
We need to open some Congressional hearings and start investigating the
religious radicals right here in the U.S.A. Some of them have
undoubtedly penetrated the highest levels of government.
We need to bring these traitorous, religious radicals into the spot
light and ask them questions like:
"Have you now or have you ever been a member of any radical religious
organization?"
humbubba
> what does "global reach" exactly mean? - at least it offered
> man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" - the definition of
> "radical" or "extremist" is even looser.
>
> It all depends on your point of view.
>
> _____________________________________________________
>
> The "enemy" is whoever Georgie Bush wants him to be.
>
> Harry
Classic witch-hunt. Bush is the enemy of the USA.
Rick Hohensee
humbubba
Bush is the terrorist, with a witch flavor. Bush hates the US
Constitution. The Constitution he and the military have sworn to
uphold. Bush has done more damage to the US than any terrorist ever
could, EXACTLY AS OSAMA BIN LADEN HOPED.
The Global Witch-hunt Of Terror is exactly like the one in Salem where
the local voodoo priestess got a lot of innocent people burned as
witches. This is the New Haven witch hunt, but this one is global.
Bush worships a 40' stone owl and thinks that he, G Dubya Bush, is God.
Basic witch-ism. Why else could he think the military has to uphold an
oath that he doesn't?
End the witch-hunt. Here's how...
At noon on the day after this Amendment is ratified the occupants of
the offices of President and Vice President shall be removed, and
replaced for the remainder of the 2005-2009 term by Richard Allen
Hohensee, President, and Senator Russell Feingold, Vice President. This
replacement and term shall be supported by a special chain of
succession composed of random drawings from all those Senators and
Representatives who voted against the joint resolution allowing the
invasion of Iraq.
Rick Hohensee
D.Ambgjiator
"humbubba" <hohens...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Harry Hope wrote:
> >
> > http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_rob_kall_061222_bush_s__global_war_o.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"in an ever-changing, incomprehensible world the masses had reached the
point where they would, at the same time, believe everything and
nothing, think that everything was possible and that
nothing was true ...Mass propaganda discovered that its audience was
ready at all times to believe the worst, no matter how absurd and did
not particularly object to being deceived because it held every
statement to be a lie, anyhow. The totalitarian mass leaders based
their propaganda on the correct psychological assumption, that under
such conditions, one could make people believe the most fantastic
statements one day, and trust that at the next they were given
irrefutable proof of their falsehood, they would take refuge in
cynicism, instead of deserting the leaders that had lied to them, they
would protest that they had known all along that the statement was a
lie and would admire the leaders for their superior tactical
cleverness."
--Hannah Arendt, "The Origins of Totalitarianism:" 1951 isbn=0156701537
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and
over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the
propaganda."
--- George W. Bush -- Greece, N.Y., May 24, 2005
Scotius
wrote:
>Harry Hope wrote:
>> http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_rob_kall_061222_bush_s__global_war_o.htm
>>
>> December 22, 2006
>>
>> Bush's 'Global War on Radicals'
>>
>> by Robert Parry
>>
>>
>> The United States will never win the "war on terror," in part, because
>> George W. Bush keeps applying elastic definitions to the enemy, most
>> recently expanding the conflict into a war against Muslim "radicals
>> and extremists."
>>
>> With almost no notice in Official Washington, Bush has inserted this
>> new standard for judging who's an enemy as he lays the groundwork for
>> a wider conflict in the Middle East and a potentially endless world
>> war against many of the planet's one billion adherents to Islam.
>>
>> Indeed, it could be argued that the "war on terror" has now morphed
>> into the "war on radicals," allowing Bush to add the likes of Iraqi
>> Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr and the leaders of Syria and Iran to his
>> lengthening international enemies list.
>>
The only "radicals" Bush is concerned about are the ones who
know about the dirt in his family's past, and who can artuculate
reasons why his "policies" are as phony as $3 bills, hence the "Total
Information Awareness System", the "Patriot" acts, etc.