Kerry should disavow Bush's "war on terror" ....

[kentuck]

and correct it to a "war on terrorists". Because, it was terrorists that attacked us - it was not terrorism. Terrorism cannot be seen or identified or captured. Terrorists can be. I would hope Senator Kerry would make the distinction. I know it is only words but there is a world of difference in them.

[rniel]

1. god I hope so

Makes as much sense to me as declaring a war on gravity.

[whistle]

2. Agreed, I think it's time that Americans no longer be exposed to...

..."New-speak" and begin hearing real English again. Go John Kerry/John Edwards:kick:

[library_max]

3. I disagree.

Only intellectuals care about words, and the rest of the country distrusts the hell out of us. Better to point out how badly Bush is doing in said war, and how much better he (Kerry) could do.

[kentuck]

4. Non-intellectuals could even grasp such a simple concept....

I would think?

[library_max]

5. They could grasp it if they stopped and listened.

If we can actually get them to stop and listen once, do you really think this is what we should take the time to explain to them? The difference between a war on terror and a war on terrorISTS? I still think we're better off sticking with the lousy job Bush has done and the superior job Kerry would do.

IMO, it's not really accurate to call it a "war on" anything. Counterterrorism is more a matter of intelligence and police work. But see, again, it matters less what you call it and more whether you can do a better job of it.