General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIs It Peacetime or Wartime in America?
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/09/obamas-losing-battle-with-perpetual-war/380060/?nbshho
Barack Obama delivered a bewildering speech on Wednesday. The pledge to "destroy" the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria; the deployment of U.S. troops to do just that; the flag-flanked, sober-sounding president addressing the American people behind a podium in prime-timeall appeared to amount to a declaration of war.
But Obama never used the word "war" to describe his decision to launch airstrikes against ISIS and provide military assistance to regional forces fighting the extremist group. When he employed the w-word, it was to clarify what this is not. It's not "another ground war in Iraq." It's not Afghanistan. It's a "counterterrorism campaign" to "take out ISIL wherever they exist." Obama didn't say how long the campaign would take, or how we'll know when its mission is accomplished.
The effect was to thoroughly blur the boundary between peacetime and wartime. And maybe that was on purpose. After all, it was less than a year and a half ago that Obama promised, in an address at National Defense University, to remove America from the "perpetual war footing" it had assumed since the September 11 attacks. On Wednesday night, he seemingly tried to honor that pledge while simultaneously preparing the country for military operations against ISIS. Did the president announce a war? A military action? Targeted strikes? Are there meaningful differences between these terms? It's not all that clear.
In the 13 years since 9/11, Americans have grown accustomed to the ambiguity of U.S. efforts to deter, disrupt, and preempt the threats posed by a shape-shifting cast of terrorist groups. The ebbs and flows of America's inexorable counterterrorism campaigns have produced a tangled web of terminology. For evidence, take a look at the many ways the New York Times homepage referred to Obama's intervention on Thursday:
Shrike47
(6,913 posts)We'll pay for it by cutting something for poor people.
ctsnowman
(1,903 posts)Earth_First
(14,910 posts)You've gotta keep the machine fed or else rich folk might starve to death...
Feral Child
(2,086 posts)I think it's perpetual now.
Smarmie Doofus
(14,498 posts)Profit: political and/or financial.
Feral Child
(2,086 posts)Ruled by rich old fucks with more cash than they can possibly spend, staying alive so they can acquire more.
And more.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)noiretextatique
(27,275 posts)and furthermore, it is perfectly fine because the president is a D.
Bonhomme Richard
(9,000 posts)a DOD employee in DC that these guys wanted perpetual war and it wouldn't matter who came in after them. They had so many minions in government jobs that this would go on and on.
Prophetic.
dumbcat
(2,120 posts)doesn't it? When was the last time there were several years in a row with no, wars, "police actions" or "interventions"?
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
neverforget
(9,436 posts)Our priorities are fucked up.
Blue Owl
(50,347 posts)n/t
rock
(13,218 posts)We can go with that.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)So...it's on. Since Nov. 22, 1963.