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.

 

Obama declared a war on terror over, what does that mean...?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 10:40 AM
link   
The war on terror was to over throw the American People as near as I can tell.
does that mean the police will again put "to serve and protect" back on the cars.?
are they gonna stand trial for the 911 crime... ?
are they gonna step up gun laws...?
are they gonna stop bombing people..?
are they gonna stop invading innocent countries...?
exactly what is he saying... end the war on terror.... we haven't won yet, Mr. Obama///
we dont declare victory with the enemy still running the show...

[edit on 7-8-2009 by BornPatriot]




posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by BornPatriot
 


From what I understand, they just decided that it was stupid to call it a 'War on Terror.' Just as it would be stupid to call it a 'War on Meanie Butt Poopy Pants.'

Nothing is going to change, except maybe the name. Rights won't comeback magically. Illegal wiretapping won't suddenly be stopped. Humantitarian crimes won't be prosecuted. We won't make less guns. We won't stop sending our young men and women off to die in some foreign land. We won't stop accruing trillions in debt to feed a machine that eats the American people and spits out happy politicians.

I AM following this story with a great deal of interest however, as I am a huge fan of semantics. (no, not the antivirus)


Any bets on what we are officially going to call the killing now?

I sort of like 'The Peace Doctrine.' Has a nice ring. 'We're not waging war against violence, we're fighting for peace.'


[edit on 7-8-2009 by KSPigpen]



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 10:53 AM
link   
war on terror is not over

war in iraq is over



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by dino1989
war on terror is not over

war in iraq is over


I disagree. The 'War' in Iraq, which I don't think WAS ever 'officially' a 'war' hasn't changed very much. The agreement was that the troops be out by 2012. We are still there.



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 11:05 AM
link   
Reply to post by KSPigpen
 


Well I disagreew with you lol. Ive done two tours in iraq and this last one 08-09 was a significant change.

The US forces really dont have much say so. My whole time over there was spent doing inventories and retrograde.

For that reason I do suspect that the name of the operations in the middle east will change. The war isn't over, it's just evolving.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 11:15 AM
link   
exactly, all he is doing is ending the phrase, war on terror" we are still very much at war with islam wether people like it or not. because it is in islamic countries were all the fighting is happening... be it not all of islam we are at war with but certainly the wahhabists and salafi we are... which is also conradictory as saudi arabia, our allies, are the country and people who spread these ideals in the first place...



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by KSPigpen
Any bets on what we are officially going to call the killing now?
[edit on 7-8-2009 by KSPigpen]


Why would the mainstream media want to talk about killing when we have such intriguing topics as Obama's golf game and whether the presidents dog is named Joe the Plumber, lol. Funny thing is the way this world has evolved to 24 hour news, the numbers seem to show the War on Terror and Killing are very good for cable news ratings.



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Agree2Disagree
 


Hehe. I love it when someone disagrees. I might get cocky otherwise.


It's been a really long time since I wore ANYone's uniform, so I'll have to take your word that things have changed significantly.

From what I understand, as recent as a month ago, the Iraqi people were wondering why we were still there, Claiming that there seemed to be more troops there than ever, that clean water and electricity were still spotty at best...it's hard for a layman to see what positive impact we've had there and I suppose I'm being oversimplistic, but if we still have a hundred thousand military and contractor boots on the ground, what difference does it make if we say the 'war' (which isn't really a war) is over? (when troop concentrations and violence haven't changed)

Seems like a barroom brawl to me, that has just spilled out on to the parking lot.



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Perhaps this can answer your question.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by 12.21.12
 


noticed you signature... ISSIS... interesting ...



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 01:19 PM
link   
It's hard to fight two major wars at the same time.

Obama's war on the American people is now the top priority.



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by RRconservative
It's hard to fight two major wars at the same time.

Obama's war on the American people is now the top priority.


That is the real truth



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 06:35 AM
link   
Its the same as We are not going to eat French Fries !!! One extra large freedom fries with some ketchup plz

Obama is a bigger liar than Bush and he talks the way he does so the idiot American masses can be decieved



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 12:42 AM
link   
reply to post by BornPatriot
 


He means that the war's focus has shifted to be fought here in the U.S. on 'you' and not 'terror"....


[edit on 12-8-2009 by ButterCookie]




top topics



 
0

log in

join