http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1139611812970&call_pageid=968332188492&StarSource=RSS

Quote :

"New name, same conflict Remember the `War on Terror'? The Bush administration has subtly redubbed it `The Long War' Some analysts see the name change as part of a battle to widen presidential powers, Tim Harper writes Feb. 11, 2006. 01:00 AM TIM HARPER WASHINGTON BUREAU 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." U.S. analysts and government officials this week point to the rebranding as another attempt to gird a skeptical public for an ongoing, generational commitment of troops at war, a bid to try to revive and augment international co-operation with Washington and a way of justifying ever-expanding presidential powers under Bush. They believe it is an attempt by a self-described wartime president to entrench his cherished wartime powers, helping him fend off attacks on an electronic surveillance program some say is illegal. Or, some say, it could be a return to a tried-and-true tactic from this White House, the use of fear. By speaking of a war for a generation, they say, the Bush administration is trying to keep the population fearful for a generation, mainly fearful of electing "soft-on-security Democrats." It has worked before, when the administration spoke of "mushroom clouds" in Iraq before the 2003 invasion, or faced accusations of raising terror levels at home during turbulent political times. Just as the new name was being slapped on an old war, Bush was filling in details of a thwarted 2002 terrorist plot in which Al Qaeda sought to blow up the largest building in Los Angeles. New York Democratic Senator Hillary Clinton said the Republican game plan is all about getting America scared again. "Contrary to Franklin Roosevelt, (who said) we have nothing to fear but fear itself, this crowd is: `All we've got is fear, and we're going to keep playing the fear card,'" she said. John Pike, a military analyst at GlobalSecurity.Org, suggests, with tongue firmly planted in cheek, that the Pentagon should call it The Forever War. "We're in the 17th year of The Long War," he says, arguing the U.S. has been in perpetual combat since it intervened in Panama to remove Manuel Noriega from power in 1989. "Since then, we have been blowing somebody up, or getting ready to blow somebody up or coming back from blowing somebody up," he says. "It is so normal, people don't even notice any more." But he doesn't believe the rebranding is about fear as much as it is about the Bush administration trying to consolidate its so-called "war powers." "It's not about bin Laden any more," he says. "People aren't scared of him any more. "My fear is that it is really the inauguration of the second Republic here because if you look closely at where this president is claiming his legal powers, it completely redefines the powers of the American government." Simpson agrees. "This provides a rationale for the expansion of presidential power in wartime," he says. "Many people question the rationale, but the argument is that these powers are needed because we are at war. "If it is a Long War, it means that they will be needed not just this year, but next year and for decades. This is a fundamental change in U.S. policy." Although the first use of the term "Long War" is credited in 2004 to Gen. John Abizaid, the U.S. Central Command chief, it really had its public coming-out Jan. 31 in the U.S. president's State of the Union address."

I wonder if any of the guys on his team know that they could make a shitload more money doing this in the private sector.

2/12/2006 2:10:27 AM

The Long War to me sounds even worse than The War on Terror. It almost directly wreaks of 1984.

2/12/2006 2:18:46 AM

meet the new boss, same as the old boss

2/12/2006 2:20:18 AM

hey at least it's better than the GSAVE...

2/12/2006 2:59:44 AM

democrats shouldn't have a problem with the idea of renaming problems in order to solve them... having renamed themselves from liberals to progressives for pretty much the same reason

2/12/2006 3:39:46 AM

The Long War, hmm?

it has such an optimistic ring to it.

2/12/2006 3:42:07 AM

wtf?! The Long War sounds worse than The War on Terror. Who the fuck wants to be stuck in a LONG war??

2/12/2006 10:44:10 AM

aha "The Long War"

JUST LIKE IT WAS PREDICTED

[Edited on February 12, 2006 at 11:32 AM. Reason : THE END TIMES ARE NEAR BOOGIE BOOGIE BOOGIE]

2/12/2006 11:31:45 AM

if you rearrange the letters in "the long war" and subtract the date (021106) from their converted ascii equivalent, and then arrange them in two columns approximating the proportions of the twin towers, and read them off backwards, they spell ARMAGEDDON


holy shit

2/12/2006 11:38:22 AM

I noticed that too. freaky

2/12/2006 11:57:07 AM

This is a joke, right? This isn't actually happening, is it?

2/12/2006 12:48:46 PM

We're not scaremongering
This is really happening, happening
We're not scaremongering
This is really happening, happening
Mobiles working
Mobiles chirping
Take the money run
Take the money run
Take the money

2/12/2006 12:54:57 PM

Yorkachu, I choose you!!!

2/12/2006 1:08:10 PM

i miss when america made sense

2/12/2006 2:17:20 PM

aha

when was that?

2/12/2006 2:18:26 PM

When we dressed up like injuns and threw tea into the ocean.

2/12/2006 2:29:16 PM

Quote :

"The Long War to me sounds even worse than The War on Terror. It almost directly wreaks of 1984."

exactly what I thought

2/12/2006 2:31:42 PM

2/12/2006 2:37:24 PM

JANE STOP THIS CRAZY THING!!!

When we quit fighting over commodities and make an action a thing
Then war is a commodity in itself.

Oh please mother of god bail me out from my billion dollar machine

2/12/2006 5:05:05 PM

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."

THINK TANK!

2/12/2006 5:07:44 PM

this stupid shit is why i don't vote (also i am incredibly lazy and hate america)

2/12/2006 5:30:45 PM

i guess "Global Struggle Against Extremism" didn't go over so well.

2/12/2006 6:03:48 PM

this reminds me of this one essay we covered in HI 452,

THE LONG, HARD ROAD TO DEMOCRACY

2/12/2006 6:51:33 PM

Quote :

"Then war is a commodity in itself. Oh please mother of god bail me out from my billion dollar machine"

thats some 1984 shit right there sir

like, i read that chapter in bed this morning

2/12/2006 6:55:34 PM

I still think we should get back to the "Crusade Against Terror" or something like that...

2/12/2006 6:57:11 PM

what is in room 101?

2/12/2006 6:59:22 PM

at least they didn't go with....

'the war to end all wars'

2/12/2006 7:25:08 PM

BTW, that's a good magazine....I used to subscribe.

2/12/2006 8:38:39 PM

Why not adopt Pike's suggestion and call it The Forever War?

2/13/2006 1:38:39 PM

This is what happens when Rove is busy avoiding arrest.

2/13/2006 1:40:15 PM

By flying into the Canadian wilderness?

2/13/2006 9:08:52 PM