It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


If you loved the WOT and The War on Global Extremism, you'll love the new name!

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 09:19 PM
Ladies and gentleman, The Long War!

WASHINGTON—Deep in the bowels of the Pentagon, some of the country's finest military minds met recently, synthesizing ideas, debating proposals and trading strategies.

Their goal — a rebranding for the history books.

When they emerged, they had completed their semantic sleight-of-hand.

They had simply changed wars, consigning the "War on Terror" to the recycling bin and launching "The Long War."

In a George W. Bush White House well-schooled in the art of propaganda, an administration re-elected for its steely determination to stay on message, renaming a war is a new triumph of marketing.

"The War on Terror brand had gone sour," says Christopher Simpson, an expert on political communications at Washington's American University.

"It connoted abuse of power, an indiscriminate use of violence as much by the U.S. as its opponents; it barely had the support of 50 per cent of Americans and was opposed by a large percentage of the international population.

"So you rebrand. You rename to try to get rid of the past perceptions. You find a new bumper sticker."

The Star

See also: Rumsfeld Offers Strategies for Current War
US military plans for 'long war'
Ability to Wage 'Long War' Is Key To Pentagon Plan

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

I like "The Long War". It sounds epic, like a five-part tv mini-series. The real question is, will it sell in '08?

posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 10:12 PM
While in college a professor was fond of saying "You can shine a turd till it sparkles golden. But youve still got a turd."

Long War, War on Terror, call it whatever you want. Its still *mod edit, do NOT attempt to bypass censors* and it still stinks.

[edit on 15-2-2006 by Xibalba]

[edit on 15-2-2006 by Amuk]

posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 10:19 PM
That's funny. I agree with the shine a turd analogy in this case, though I disagree with Xibalba's last sentiment (believe it or not

posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 11:22 PM
I don't like the name. I'd prefer "The PNAC Wars." Because then we can include Iraq.

[edit on 15-2-2006 by Rickey Gerard Perez]

posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 11:25 PM
What about "The Neverending Warry"?

Hah! I made a pun and a cultural reference!

posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 11:35 PM

Originally posted by Rickey Gerard Perez
I don't like the name. I'd prefer "The PNAC Wars." Because then we can include Iraq.

Isn't Iraq part and parcel of the WoT?

Maybe in 500 years or so it will be known as the PNAC Wars. For now it's "The Long War." I'm gonna start using it today

Spin spin sugar

posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 02:07 AM
How about "The Hundred Year War"? Oops, already taken!

Maybe "The Wrongest War"? Too partisan?

OK, final offer

"The War To Include ALL Wars" !

[edit on 16-2-2006 by Bhadhidar]

posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 02:17 AM
This name seems a bit on the negative side for politicians. Maybe not so much for military industry.

It would seem very hard to sell to the public the word "long" with the word "war". Many politicians are going to fall on their swords for this name. They would do better to just call it the "short war" and continue the bullcrap they pull today. The public hates long wars. At least thats what the 20th century seemed to show.

[edit on 16-2-2006 by heelstone]

posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 02:28 AM
1984, anybody?

Whatever happened to the 'war to end all wars'? I liked that one better.

top topics


log in