| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| NYT Memory: Does Calling It Jihad Make It So? |
| 2006-08-13 |
| SOON after the British police announced last week that they had broken up a plot to blow up aircraft across the Atlantic, President Bush declared the affair “a stark reminder that this nation is at war with Islamic fascists.” British officials, on the other hand, referred to the men in custody as “main players,” and declined to discuss either their motives or ideology so that they would not jeopardize “criminal proceedings.” The difference in these initial public characterizations was revealing: The American president summoned up language reaffirming that the United States is locked in a global war in which its enemies are bound together by a common ideology, and a common hatred of democracy. For the moment, the British carefully stuck to the toned-down language of law enforcement. |
| Posted by:Slenter Hupavins5895 |
| #1 "A critical debate in America today — among political candidates and among national security experts — is whether five years of war declarations and war-making have helped to make the United States more secure." Oh, bullshit. To whatever extent our actions have failed to secure their objectives, it is because the liberal establishment of this country-- the Democratic Party, their paid propagandists masquerading as "the media" and their lefty indoctrination cadres in our universities-- has singlemindedly devoted itself to convincing the enemy we are weak, irresolute, and on the verge of giving up and going home any minute now. Had they not done so, the results so far would have been drastically different. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2006-08-13 12:32 |