Obama drops the phrase "War on Terror"

// added March 25, 2009 // 76 comments //
Image...
current89
The Obama Administration has asked members of the Defense Dept. to drop the phrase "War on Terror." The memo said "this administration prefers to avoid using the term 'Long War' or 'Global War on Terror' [GWOT.] Please use 'Overseas Contingency Operation.' "

Article Source: The Washington Post Online
Photo Source: The New York Times Online

It's about time, the entire phrase "war on terror" is grammatically incorrect.
  1. groups:
    News,   Picked for Current Tonight
  2. tags:
    News Picked for Current Tonight President Obama Good UK

76 comments // Obama drops the phrase "War on Terror"

  • macfan
  • Wang111
  • TeejK
  • Sexirobot
  • McKanna
    • 0
      McKanna  
    • I hated "War on Terror," but "Overseas Contingency Operation" is almost worse! I mean, what the hell is that? Could you be any more vague, Mr. President?

      And anyway, it really doesn't matter what you call it. Everyone's sick of all the platitudes spouted by American politicians in the last decade (or decades, really). Now more than ever, actions speak louder than words.

    • 11 months ago
  • donratto
    • 0
      donratto  
    • it's not 'overseas' though is it? personally i like 'action against arseholes' but i can see why it's not viable.
      what about 'vorsprung durch.... no wait....
      'love thy neighbour'?

      no... i've got it 'positive intercultural development program'...too many words?...

      oh dear...

    • 11 months ago
  • honusurf
  • Ricky84
  • donratto
  • igordy
    • 0
      igordy [removed]  
    • Wag, wag, wag the tail... "Overseas Contingency Operation" - why not call it "International Submission Tactics" or better yet - "Anal Cavity Surrender"!!! WTF does it matter what you call it? Those fanatics will hit us when we least expect it - they have patience, and as soon as you relax your sphincter - you will be had!!!

    • 11 months ago
  • bethlostcontrol
  • nursediesel
    • 0
      nursediesel  
    • It's just rephasing the terminology. Making it less hateful, more exceptable. In a word. Hype. Every politician does it. Like global warming is now climate change. Easier to swallow. Bush needed a strong phrase to get his point across, it's advertising; getting people to see it the way you want them to.
      You're kinda hungry right now. A little snack would be really good mmmmaybe a bag of crispy tasty potato chips would really hit the spot right now... instead of I want some greasy, salty fried root slices, to smear on my work, to tie me over 'til supper.

    • 11 months ago
  • ferrjuan
  • Juas
  • S3th
    • 0
      S3th  
    • It's not the words that are the problem! It's the actions. And sadly, it seems the actions will continue, no matter what words they use to define them.

      I'm still shocked to see how many still believe the US is so weak, guys with camels and AK 47's in a desert thousands of miles away, are somehow a threat to our security, and stability.

      All we need to do to look for the threat to our countries stability is drive out to DC and watch the fuckers on the HILL!

    • 11 months ago
  • maasanova
    • 0
      maasanova  
    • Obama was fear mongering when he said he wanted to protect America from another terror attack the other day. Can't find the source but I know he said it.

    • 11 months ago
  • gonzolively
    • 0
      gonzolively  
    • Thank God!! Now if we could only get Fox News to stop using the term and stop their war mongering then I think that gives the US a much needed edge at beating pessimism and creating a positive atmosphere for peace to began to flourish.

    • 11 months ago
  • bailey78
  • neocongo
    • 0
      neocongo  
    • Lot of people here seem to like the name "War on Terror." I think it keeps things simple for you, and keeps you in a state of constant agitation to fear, which seems to be your comfort zone. It also keeps you woefully susceptible to LimbaughFox Propaganda. Please, don't let anything change that. Rational thinking is for pussies!

    • 11 months ago
  • noxidereus
    • 0
      noxidereus  
    • I think the name change is good because the phrase "war on terror" assumes that our actions are really to fight terrorism (a neverending battle), and that all our enemies are terrorists. I also agree that merely changing the name doesn't change the reality of what we are doing. But I am happy with the name change on its own merits.

    • 11 months ago
  • JanforGore
  • ClareW
    • 0
      ClareW  
    • If War on Terror is grammatically incorrect (which I completely agree with) then how to they see Global War on Terror as any different? I think this is almost more annoying purely because now the media have a stupid acronym to use.

    • 11 months ago
  • iemitremmusi
  • barnabasnagy
  • Found_Avenue
    • 0
      Found_Avenue  
    • The phrase "War On Terror" has made America sound like a country of 12 year-olds ever since Bush coined it. It's impossible to WIN or END a "War on Terror" - as comedian David Cross points out, its like having a "War on Jealousy." It's a war on a CONCEPT and it's impossible to win.

      Thank goodness Obama "re-branded" it. Now, maybe we can END it.

    • 11 months ago
  • el_chivo
  • TheEmpireGuy
  • Sam_the_Wizer
    • 0
      Sam_the_Wizer  
    • I don't like 'Overseas Contingency Operation.' It sounds bureaucratic and deceiving. Deceptive terms like this have been employed in the past to mask attrocities committed by governments. Not that I liked the term War on Terror either. Maybe we should make an ammendment to the constitution requiring that the phrases used by the government be more accurate in what they describe.

    • 11 months ago
  • GoliathandDavid
  • Highr0ller
    • 0
      Highr0ller [removed]  
    • It's about the OIL

      Let's hope this administration is more honest and not fighting wars for commodities in the name of something else.

      There never was a war on terror................it was a sham cover up to get at OIL.

    • 11 months ago
  • yonie
  • amilli23
  • Marmadude3
  • joecitizen
    • 0
      joecitizen  
    • Nothing bi-partisan here mutedmajority, renaming an issue is simply having a meeting to plan the next meeting... how about a meeting that accomplishes something meaningful for the american citizens and doesn't cost us anything?

    • 11 months ago
  • mutedmajority
  • joecitizen
    • 0
      joecitizen  
    • joecitizen:

      Lib is pretty tame compared to the right-wing wacko lingo constantly thrown around... Ignoring the "retard" comment, we're pretty much on the same page.
      I'm sure you've heard the saying, "keep your friends close and your enemies closer..." Sleep with one eye open and a loaded gun under your pillow mutedmajority, because the jackboots are banging at average joe americas front door.

    • 11 months ago
  • richjm
    • 0
      richjm  
    • How cool. It always sounded desperately forced when Gordon Brown and David Cameron used this phrase. Hopefully they'll drop it now as well.

    • 11 months ago
  • joecitizen
  • mutedmajority
  • Robroy1
    • 0
      Robroy1  
    • It is great to have a president that invokes confidence and has a command of English and can say many sentences in a row without the ah's ooh's and fumbling of words and phrases and actually looks professional. The Freaking moronic idiot Bush scared the hell out of America and the world with his presence behind a microphone. It showed the world how dumb and dim witted a person can be and still fix an election in America. The world was laughing at America and it's idiotic president who murdered many people for personal greed. Keep going Obama, at least you have credibility and the knowledge needed to run the country. We don't need any more morons in the Whitehouse, put Bush and Cheeneey and thier minions in GITMO and then close it forever.

    • 11 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • Robroy1:

      Sad that now the only prerequisite for being considered a competent president of this country (besides selling your soul to the puppet masters) is the ability to string more than two sentences together. It doesn't change the fact however, of what these people are all doing to the future of our children. How many years do you surmise it will take for this next generation to dig themselves out of seven trillion dollars in debt if it is even possible?

    • 11 months ago
  • joecitizen
    • 0
      joecitizen  
    • Call it anything you want, we are still dealing with a war against terrorism. It is a fact. If it makes you sensitive types feel better to rename it, go for it although I'm sure the time & money it took to make this "change" could've been better spent elsewhere.

    • 11 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • Big deal. As long as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan go on I don't give a damn what they call it, it is still war and we are still paying for it. So sick of the Obama syncophants who can't see beyond the same hype that Bush supporters put out about him to justify their 'love.' Meanwhile, the Congress and government robs us blind. Why did Obama vote to give these banks a bailout in the first place? He is only making it look as if he is angry about "bonuses" now because he like all of the thieves before him underestimated the anger of the American people. But what better puppet to place in there after the last puppet. He can sweet talk our entire future away from us and no one even flinches.

      SEVEN TRIILLION in debt over the next ten years and he doesn't even give a damn that it is our children who will be saddled with it as he continues war in Afghanistan and will leave troops in Iraq. And dropping some Bs phrase in another empty gesture is what people think should be number one news. We sure do need a revolution in this country to throw all of these crooks out. Saddling my son with this debt is not something I am about to gush over. Anyone over the age of 10 should be downright angry at what is being done now. But of course, party syncophants who put party and the man over principle will never understand that as they get sweet talked into giving their shirt away. Typical.

    • 11 months ago
  • kleigh
  • mutedmajority
  • SDLN
  • chit86
    • 0
      chit86  
    • how is this so great? if anything it just seems like the administration doesn't want to draw attention to the war anymore even though its still as real and brutal as its ever been. i'm not agreeing with the bush administrations fear propaganda by any means but honestly don't heap praise up on obama for changing the name especially when the intentions behind it might be just as cunning as the bush administrations

    • 11 months ago
  • neocongo
    • 0
      neocongo  
    • chit86:

      The war? Which war you talkin bout? Iraq? Afghanistan? Or the one brewing in Pakistan? You see how you refer to "the" war rather than a specific one? To you it's all lumped into one homogenous category, when in fact, it's far, far more complex.

    • 11 months ago
  • chit86
    • 0
      chit86  
    • chit86:

      lol what does that have to do with what i said anyways? it could be for any of those wars but fear propaganda or diverting attention from the reality of whats going on is still wrong. and maybe they're not really diverting attention which i hope is the case but still this isn't a significant thing obama has done, he changed a name lol.

      but the war i was refering to was the iraq war, because of the controversy about invading it and how terrorism was used to get us there.

    • 11 months ago
  • DougChristian
    • 0
      DougChristian  
    • chit86:

      You really don't understand the difference? Remarkable. He didn't change the name of the Iraq War. That's still a war. Don't worry, you've still got your precious war. He's changing the name of the "War on Terror", which, like the "War on Drugs", is just a way to bypass liberty for expediency by making a policy stance seem like a war. You're going to have to think deeper if we're ever going to get anywhere. Don't be a Hannity.

    • 11 months ago
  • neocongo
  • joecitizen
  • mutedmajority
  • Sam_the_Wizer
  • curiousitykilled
    • 0
      curiousitykilled  
    • Why don't they rename the war on drugs too and change their policies on that issue? Currently it should be called the "expensive futile policy issue". What do you think? I'm glad they are changing the policies on our overseas contingency operation but this isnt a very catchy title.

    • 11 months ago
  • maasanova
    • 0
      maasanova  
    • What's the big deal with changing the rhetoric when the actions remain the same?

      It'd be better if the Overseas Contingency Operations ended altogether since we know it's all based onl bullshit anyways.

    • 11 months ago
  • Future_America
  • ashgallagher
  • allIknowis
  • cerealforeal
  • lebow
    • 0
      lebow  
    • Do you feel "Overseas Contigency Operation" is specific or really says what it is we're doing there? It's another vague euphamism to make it more digestable and tolerable to the American public.

    • 11 months ago
  • lebow
    • 0
      lebow  
    • Do you feel "Overseas Contigency Operation" is specific or really says what it is we're doing there? It's another vague euphamism to make it more digestable and tolerable to the American public.

    • 11 months ago
  • privateibber
    • 0
      privateibber  
    • These are criminals. Whether they're running drugs or blowing up schoolbusses or flying planes into buildings.
      Give them a booking number and not a marble likeness.
      Throw the bums out. Don't make them martyrs. That is the entire goal.
      SPECIFICITY like Neocongo says.
      Words are very powerful. Bytes become symbolic and as powerful as a good Viagra commercial. If you will notice the bytes are always two or three words. Moral Majority. War on Terror. Evil Empire. Axis of Evil.

    • 11 months ago
  • sydtaylor
  • Alanisnotcool
    • 0
      Alanisnotcool  
    • sydtaylor:

      just because they no longer use that oh so famous phrase doesnt mean that they will avoid instilling fear into our minds. do you still see reports of murder and hate crimes on the local and national mainstream news? i dont think i need to explain further

    • 11 months ago
  • allIknowis
  • sydtaylor
    • 0
      sydtaylor  
    • sydtaylor:

      You're totally right Alanisnotcool, but now you're talking about the media. I was referring to the fact that this current administration aims to inform the people, not scare them. Just take a look at all the White House's Weekly Web Adresses. But again, you're right, fear is still being used as a tool. I was just saying that I like the direction this administration is taking.

    • 11 months ago
  • mgerlach22
    • 0
      mgerlach22  
    • Sounds like a continuation of our nation falling to the out-of-control political correctness that has turned us all into pansies.

      Way to make the 3000+ innocent lives lost on 9/11 seem replaceable. Because it wasn't an act of terrorism that happened that day, it was an unfortunate series of man-made disasters that occurred on US soil. Unbelievable that this stuff is considered news.

    • 11 months ago
  • neocongo
  • jh64487
    • 0
      jh64487  
    • mgerlach22:

      are you stupid? of course 9/11 was terrorism. But the term "global war on terror" is stupid. you can't fight a war against an ideal (not with military force anyways). in fact, all we have done is strengthen the idealism of the terrorists.

      so way to go bush administration. making the world a more dangerous place.

    • 11 months ago
  • Mark701
    • 0
      Mark701  
    • mgerlach22:

      What in Gods name is your point?

      This country has been traumatized by Cheney/Bush for the last eight years with color coded alerts, duct tape and the never ending chant of terror, terror, terror. It served THEIR purpose to keep us afraid which in essence made THEM the terrorists.

      Changing the name places terrorism in proper perspective turning it into something that must be managed rather than something to live in fear of, which of course is what all terrorists want.

      As far as being a nation of pansies, speak for yourself.

    • 11 months ago
  • mgerlach22
    • 0
      mgerlach22  
    • mgerlach22:

      My point is that this is a waste of the administration's time. The mission is still the same...defeat Muslim extremists and dismantle Al Qaeda. This administration would rather sweep these issues under the rug with fancy terminology than face them head on for what they are. So the members of the military don't fight wars anymore...they now participate in contingency operations in foreign nations. Give me a break.

      Obama has time to change the name of wars we're fighting, go on Leno, fill out his March Madness bracket, do a "60 Minutes" interview, but can't seem to find the time to read through a piece of legislation that HE signed that included the bonuses for AIG. Only when the American people created noise, did he actually investigate what the piece of legislation contained and react. Sounds like a major mismanagement of priorities.

    • 11 months ago
  • cynker
  • neocongo
    • 0
      neocongo  
    • Getting rid of this Orwellian phrase is an exceptionally good idea. It forces government leaders to be specific about what they are doing, instead of having a nebulous, never-ending umbrella under which they can do anything.

    • 11 months ago
  • Mr_Costello
  • keviar
  • lebow
    • 0
      lebow  
    • It's representative of this new administration trying to re brand our current problems and put more distance between themselves and the previous administration. Whatever we call it, it's still a enormously expensive (in human lives, not to mention the financial costs) and extremely challenging situation that has no easy end in sight.

      Re-brand the war however you like, it doesn't change the reality of the insurmountable challenges in the region.

    • 11 months ago
  • bombastinator
    • 0
      bombastinator  
    • lebow:

      Seems like more of an un-branding than a re-branding, but I take your point.

      I think it shows the more global view of this administration. Political oratory is frequently tuned to the desired audience. If it is tuned enough it starts to sound like garbage to anyone not in the desired target range. This is one reason taliban and Al Queda oratory makes them sound like they are completely bugnuts. They often aren't actually talking to us even when they claim they are. The real target audience is rich conservative Muslims who have money to donate.

      Dubyah's speech had been exactly the same thing.
      This is not a new issue. I had a college roomate who even though he was american spent most of his growing up living in north africa during the end of the cold war. Sitting in america the us sounded reasonableand the soviets sounded crazy, but sitting in africa, who no one cared about, they both sounded equally crazy.
      Bush's speech has been equally focused... at us, with an aim to get support for his administration's policies and short term concerns.

      it looks like the new administration is finally paying attention to how things sound outside of the united states. I personally laud this.

    • 11 months ago
  • privateibber
  • kennymotown
    • 0
      kennymotown  
    • Good post current89, wording and sound bites are more important than we think. I can honestly say you have posted some great posts and I'm trying to keep up with them. You are a very thoughtful person.

    • 11 months ago
  • current89
    • 0
      current89  
    • kennymotown:

      Thanks! "I'm trying to keep up with them" Hope I don't send you to many! BTW your comments are always great, you tell it like it is! And I agree, wording and sound bites are really important, a few words can change a conversation.

    • 11 months ago
  • cztheday
    • 0
      cztheday  
    • kennymotown:

      Sorry, Current89, but I am afraid I am going to have to disagree with kennymotown. I can't count the number of times I will see a string of posts from a certain element on this site who will have worked themselves up to such a froth that they will have created a nearly perfect storm of ignorance and factual distortion. Then YOU have to come along and toss a wet blanket over the whole thing by being all "sensible" and "accurate." There is a word for people like you, Current89, and that word is "RATIONAL." There, I have said it. I am sorry if I shattered you illusions, but somebody needed to level with you before this pattern of behavior on your part became permanent. With a little counseling (I would bet that Clownpuncher would give you a good rate), I think you still have a chance at a normal, ignorant, apathetic life. We can only hope that the disorder from which you suffer has not begun to spread. No...no...don't thank me -- this is the least any true patriot could do. Just promise me that you will do the same for someone else someday...

    • 11 months ago

Add your comment

current videos