Tell bin Laden Obama has "Ended" the War on Terror

They base their struggle from the words in this book.

Liberals reject labels, they claim, because they seek to define things hence Obamakare isn’t really “socialized medicine” it is healthcare “reform.”  Of course, when speaking about Republicans, labels are all they’ve got (George W. Bush = Adolf Hitler, for example).  And now it’s official… the U.S. is no longer fighting a “war on terror” nor are we fighting against “jihadists.”  As I wrote in April of 2009, this move was already underway but now it’s been made official.  Great job!

According to the Washington Post:

“The President does not describe this as a ‘war on terrorism,’” said John Brennan, head of the White House homeland security office, who outlined a “new way of seeing” the fight against terrorism.

The only terminology that Mr. Brennan said the administration is using is that the U.S. is “at war with al Qaeda.”

“We are at war with al Qaeda,” he said. “We are at war with its violent extremist allies who seek to carry on al Qaeda’s murderous agenda.”

Reminds one of 1984 where there is always a war going on but nobody seems to really know what it is about.  It’s funny because even if Democrats are not calling it a fight against jihadists they are certainly on a jihad.  The Obama administration sought a clever useage of words to justify doing away with the term “jihadists.”

Mr. Brennan said that to say the U.S. is fighting “jihadists” is wrongheaded because it is using “a legitimate term, ‘jihad,’ meaning to purify oneself or to wage a holy struggle for a moral goal” which “risks giving these murderers the religious legitimacy they desperately seek but in no way deserve.”

Does his logic make sense?  Well, simply because he does not see it as a legitimate moral goal does not mean al Qaeda and many Muslims around the world agree with him.  As if the continuing useage of the word “jihadists” would somehow suddenly make people think we saw their struggle as moral.  They are fighting a cultural/religious/idealogical battle against the apostate nation, America, for what they see as the moral wrongs of this country such as supporting corrupt regimes in Saudi Arabia and Egypt, occupying Muslim holy lands, supporting their enemy Israel, and selling weapons used against fellow Muslims.  From their point of view, it is tough to disagree with their grievences.  They also see the moral decay America exports such as pornography, women’s rights, abortion, gay rights, and other things they detest.

Mr. Brennan seems to get it for a minute:

As for the “war on terrorism,” Mr. Brennan said the administration is not going to say that “because ‘terrorism’ is but a tactic — a means to an end, which in al Qaeda’s case is global domination by an Islamic caliphate.”

The U.S. government is ready to go with its new termonology!

Exactly… jihadists are on a religious quest to re-establish the caliphate, or Islamic global rule, lost to them after the fall of the Ottoman Empire.  They see it as a moral battle and Islam itself is in a fight over its future whether it means staying in the 13th Century or undergoing a reformation such as Christianity did centuries ago.

In my opinion the conclusion of this article sums up why Liberals are doomed in their quest to “fight” terrorism:

But Mr. Brennan lamented “inflammatory rhetoric, hyperbole, and intellectual narrowness” surrounding the national security debate and said Mr. Obama has views that are “nuanced, not simplistic; practical, not ideological.”

Not ideological!  We are fighting against an enemy that will continue their struggle for as many generations as it takes using any tactics they can theologically justify to win.  They are ideological and so should we be as we are fighting a battle of civilizations… our vision versus theirs.

Having such a naive view means that the biggest battle… one of what to call it and how to think about it, has already been lost.

Did you like this article? Get new articles daily for free via RSS or Email.