It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"War on Terror" Now "The Struggle Against Extremism"

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 10:41 PM
link   
I understand the recent influx of "All Islam's Fault" threads now.

While the underlying theme of the "War on Terror" (according to this administration's loose cannons) has pretty much always been...

FoxNews.com
Rumsfeld: Islamic Extremism Spawns Terrorism
Sunday, June 06, 2004


SINGAPORE — The United States and its allies are winning some battles in the terrorism war but may be losing the broader struggle against Islamic extremism that is terrorism's source, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld (search) said Saturday.

The troubling unknown, he said, is whether the extremists — whom he termed "zealots and despots" bent on destroying the global system of nation-states — are turning out newly trained terrorists faster than the United States can capture or kill them.

"It's quite clear to me that we do not have a coherent approach to this," Rumsfeld said at an international security conference.

His remarks showed a level of concern about the long-term direction of the U.S.-led global fight against terrorism that Rumsfeld rarely addresses in public.


It would appear to be official now, as per tonight's Daily Show montage of this week's speeches and rationales for the rebranding of the new and improved "Struggle Against Extremism."

This is probably already widely known to several, but it's the first I've seen of the overt shift. The "War on Terror" (after which this forum is named) is no more.

No war (as those can be won). It's a struggle now. And not against terror acts (as those can be punished). We're fighting ideology.

Thoughts? I have several, mostly conflicting.




posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 11:46 PM
link   
I read a long 5-page article today talking about how the Pentagon has studied/proposed shifting it's strategy for fighting terrorism. Was an interesting read, RANT, in that it deals with the change of focus from the 'war on terrorism' in Iraq to a 'struggle against extremism', globally.
Plan Of Attack: The Pentagon has a secret new strategy for taking on terrorists--and taking them down





seekerof

[edit on 28-7-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 12:05 AM
link   
I think this is another obvious sign to the administrations growing failures in the "War on Terror". Just as in Iraq, what did we do after it was proved that there were no WMD's? We changed our rhetoric from sponsor of terror, to our need to spread democracy. Now most people in favour of the war, state how removing Saddam from power was justified, even though we all know that it was not our original reason. This latest change in rhetoric will serve exactly the same purpose.

So now we now have a new term that we are battling. In all honesty it was a brilliant move, in terms of worth of propaganda. Before one could argue "one mans terrorist, is anothers freedom fighter". Now it is a bit more difficult to take the subjective highroad. After all, who can be opposed to "violent extremism"?

Now I suppose the oppositions challenge lie in proving that the west is no less extreme than any other specific group......Definitely to be continued at a later date.



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 12:14 AM
link   
I take it this means unequivocally that the War on Terror has failed. It only took four years to reach the point of losing it too. Yet the violence still continues.

I suppose the new direction in this "struggle" will mean further violence spread even further than it already has.

[edit on 28-7-2005 by Frith]



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 12:51 AM
link   
From the 'war on terrorism' to a 'struggle against extremism' .....

What pops into my mind is - whats an extremist?
And more so, will the definitions of what an extremist is change in the future?

Are we here reading alternative information extremists?
Are we extremists if we tell others what we know?
Are we extremists if we act on this information by protesting, marching or refusing to "tow the line" in some shape or form.

Are groups who arm themselves against dictatorships, foreign or domestic, extremists?

Where does the line get drawn, and who makes the definitions?



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 01:07 AM
link   
Another buzz word additive, that only further contributes to the oblivious separation caused by this exact kind of "polarization"...


Nothing against you RANT honest, you know how I am.
If the task of ignorance denial, is some thing we all want and desire for our selves and others. Then there should be no reason to delay and act upon this for ones self. Isn't it true, that by not taking action against some thing is the same as tolerance of it? This doesn't just mean direct action, as the lyrics go, "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice".

Willing or unwilling, able to or not, the decision is made, for good or ill.

This intentional interjection will not further misdirect the topic of this post, but the message I hope was clear, besides I just had to rant in a Rant thread.

Now back to your regularly scheduled forum interactions.

[edit on 28-7-2005 by ADVISOR]



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 01:12 AM
link   
So will this struggle also take car of Christian Extremists and Jewish Extremists... also not to mention Political Extremists from all walks of politics...

I doubt it... different name, same old crap if you ask me.



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
I read a long 5-page article today talking about how the Pentagon has studied/proposed shifting it's strategy for fighting terrorism. Was an interesting read, RANT, in that it deals with the change of focus from the 'war on terrorism' in Iraq to a 'struggle against extremism', globally.
Plan Of Attack: The Pentagon has a secret new strategy for taking on terrorists--and taking them down


My next read. I had forgotten the shift to the "global" part as well, so thanks for bringing that up. I believe global has always been implied, but that was certainly part of the intentional change.


Originally posted by ADVISOR
Another buzz word additive, that only further contributes to the oblivious separation caused by this exact kind of "polarization"...


Nothing against you RANT honest, you know how I am.


Of course, nothing taken the wrong way. Just not sure I got your point on polarization. Part of the conflicting feelings I have on this shift is it sounds a heck of a lot like something Kerry spoke of and would have done long ago given the chance. And I mean more than just a name change, but a different way of thinking. And not fighting Islam, but poverty and AIDS and all the things that make extreme Islam attractive.

But knowing this administration like I do, it's difficult for me to get past the likely prospect of this merely being a cynical and superficial re-branding of just what we're already doing at a time of low polls numbers, "war" weariness and increased "terror" attacks. I sincerely hope this administration has just admitted it's first boo boo, and taken the baby steps toward changing a failing strategy, not just bought itself a $5 dollar word.

We shall see. Reading the article now... Other's appreciated.

[edit on 28-7-2005 by RANT]



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 07:51 AM
link   
now, bout 2 years down the road when this "Struggle" is still failing they will come out with a report and call it.

"Struggle on Violent Extremism"

orrignialy intended to be

"Slightly less than plesent dissagreement againt strong minded individuals willing to cause physical unneccessary damage in attempts to appease nondenominational diety while pushing personal political adgendas that we do not agree with."

claming that the entire situation was not that big a deal anyway.


"This is Chewbacca.. Chewbacca is a wookie... why am I talking about Chewbacca? This does not make sence... if Chewbacca does not make sence... you must acquit." "Here.. look at the monkey... look at the funny little monkey."


MrBunny



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
This is probably already widely known to several, but it's the first I've seen of the overt shift. The "War on Terror" (after which this forum is named) is no more.

Well... I started a thread here about it yesterday... I guess today (after Jon Stewart) was the prime time. Someone else started one after mine yesterday. We were ahead of the window, I guess...


ADVISOR - I'm glad you posted here because I didn't understand the meaning of Deny Ignorance and was searching this morning, then I saw your signature. So now I get it. Thanks.

Bringing out into the open the subtle actions of this administration to make this 'war' or 'struggle' more acceptable to the people, is, IMO, to Deny Ignorance. If we were to ignore or dismiss this change in nomenclature, we'd be acting as the sheep and ignoring ignorance. To be up-front about this to discuss it and stretch our minds and see it for what it really is, is the best way to know exactly what's going on so we can decide whether to deny it or not. JMHO.

As regards The GSAE (Global Struggle Against Extremism):
From Wikipedia:
Jihad (ǧihād جهاد) is an Islamic term, from the Arabic root ǧhd ("to exert utmost effort, to strive, struggle")

I think the administration has realized that this 'war' cannot be won; that there is no real marker that would serve as the 'end'. A struggle, however, connotes an ongoing effort. Life is a struggle, raising kids is a struggle. We can all relate to struggles, so that brings the American public more into the fight as a struggle is something we all can relate to.



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 08:30 AM
link   
Its not surprise, "war on terror" has not boundaries or nations or governments, is about ideologies, strong feelings and the righteousness.

From the beginning our country has been lead to a fantasy a "war on terror" like a country call terror with a government that can be taken down.

Extremist has been around for a long time, while war on terror is fairly a new concept.

It’s about time that somebody realized that you can fight extremist but you can not win the war on the Ideology that fuels them.



[edit on 28-7-2005 by marg6043]



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 08:36 AM
link   
Yet again to play nice with the idiots of the major press this administration is playing liberal word games.

Fact, THE WAR on TERROR will take decades. It would end sooner if the insane leftist of the world would stop their intense hate of GW. There is no fredom of speech in Islamic republics. The will be no hollywood.

The only way to defeat a terrorist is to kill them..all of them.........not play word games with the liberal media.



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 08:38 AM
link   
I have never been one to pick up on things before others, but I have been all but preaching this for months now.

And people need to understand this isnt anti-Islam, its anti-EXTREME Islam.

Although its just a small sect of Islam, it is still Islams problem as they are the only ones that can stop it.

Mainstream Islam does not have the right to question the way the West handles the problem as long as they do nothing about it.


If you let your dog crap on my lawn day after day after day and you do nothing about it, you cant say a thing to me when I shoot him.



[edit on 28-7-2005 by skippytjc]



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 08:47 AM
link   
Yes yes that i m really agreed about with you,that war onto terror has bring into another kind of war with Extremism

And some more the Extremism already becomed Extreminator and it is have grown to everywhere else in this globe



Pssst READY FOR IMPACT!!!!!



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bush43
Yet again to play nice with the idiots of the major press this administration is playing liberal word games.

Fact, THE WAR on TERROR will take decades. It would end sooner if the insane leftist of the world would stop their intense hate of GW. There is no fredom of speech in Islamic republics. The will be no hollywood.

The only way to defeat a terrorist is to kill them..all of them.........not play word games with the liberal media.


Like your namesake you are about as aware as a blind man in a room full of deaf people.(I wish I could claim that quote was an original.. sigh)

Fact, by definition "THE WAR on TERROR" is not winnable without the destruction of all sentient life. Terror or Terrorism is a ubiquities aspect of humans social interaction.

Perhaps there is such distain for GW because he is a horrible person with pathetic leadership qualities, no foresight, a total inability to govern effectively, with the business sense of a 4 year old. Who happens to have a very shrewd intelligent father who has surrounded him with manipulative highly aggressive intelligent people who care only for their own financial success.

Don't bother spouting that I am just regurgitating the leftist propaganda because I have had the misfortune of living in an area where Duh-bya was a local figure before ever even becoming Governor of Texas.

It was a major local issue when he and his brothers destroyed the S&L, I lived in Arlington Tx when his dad bought him the Rangers and in one year managed to run them into the ground and into bankrupts, I lived there when he was arrested for assault, and when he used every smear tactic on earth to out Ann Richards from the Governorship reporting that she was in AA right about the same time he was arrested for DWI.

I am sorry if this is turning into a rant but I am stunned and honestly amazed when encounter such small minded painfully malleable people who refuse to apply the slightest ounce of effort to think critically. Lashing out and pointing fingers at the faceless "Liberal Media" or "Right wing war machine" (Because yes, both sides have their blind followers) for forcing them to face even the slightest potential flaw in their chosen champion for fear of having to admit that they have ever possible been wrong about something.

I thought the whole point of this place was to deny Ignorance.. not spread it.



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 11:52 AM
link   
If I accurately understand all the words following this description of them...


Originally posted by Bush43
Insanity


It's the liberal's fault the far right changed the name of the war on the other far right.

I see.

[edit on 28-7-2005 by RANT]



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Just remember that in the beginning Bush called it a "Crusade". Gee, where have we heard that term before? Oh, I remember now... it was when a long term campaign was waged to forcibly destroy other religions in favor of Christianity. And of course the world recoiled in horror when he said this. So immediately he changed it to the "War on Terror" that we've all come to know, love, and support blindly.

I heard an interesting question today that asked if the renaming from "war" to "struggle" would have any change in combat pay. Anyone know if that could happen?



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 04:53 PM
link   
Careful, MrBunny. He'll either start going on about how you're still bitter about the election, or he'll attack your credibility. It's a natural Kool-Aid Drinker defense mechanism. He can't help it.



posted on Aug, 3 2005 @ 08:22 AM
link   
NewYorker.com

NAME CALLING
Issue of 2005-08-08 and 15
Posted 2005-08-01


You had to be a careful reader of the inside pages of the Times last week to notice that America is no longer fighting the global war on terrorism. The Administration has replaced, or revised, or expanded the G.W.O.T. with a new phrase: “a global struggle against violent extremism.” The war is now a struggle. The terrorist enemy is now the violent extremist enemy. The focus has shifted from a tactic to an ideology...



posted on Aug, 3 2005 @ 08:36 AM
link   
Nice catch Rant,

And like any other ideology like the cursades it will only bring death and devastation to the countries and people involve.

The crusades didn't amount to anything but the dark side of christianity let see what this new ideology is going to bring now.

It seems that when it comes to religious beleives and wars in the name of God man kind has not learn a darn thing yet.

pity.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join