Because "a war on terror" is not "a war". It is too loose. Too open. Too undefined.
"A war in Iraq". That makes sense. "A task-force to follow money being sent to Basque seperatists". That makes sense. "A campaign against Taliban fighters in Kandahar." That makes sense. "A war on terror". That encompasses Iraq, but according to the Bush administration, it also encompasses library workers in Colorado, people attending a bake sale in Michigan, and the guy who threw the shoe at Bush. That is just not good enough. There is no need to declare "a war on terror". That is understood by everyone but the French. We need more specific goals, targets, actions. We need to know how we are doing. If we are winning. Where we need more troops, more action, more diplomacy, more laws, less laws. Making a project "make all the websites my company needs" would get me fired. On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 11:41 AM, Bruce Sorge <[email protected]> wrote: > > You know, if you put lipstick on a pig, it is still a pig. We are at > war, and it is a global war, and it is against terrorists, so the Global > War on Terrorism is what it should be called. What is the deal about > renaming things? Sheesh. There really are no more pressing issues to > work on? The economy is fixed? Our world image has improved? Joblessness > is down? When did this happen? Did I miss my re-deployment? What month > is this? What year? Huh? What just happened? > > And WHY does it make sense not to call a war a war? > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:292714 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
