• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama Scraps 'Global War on Terror' for 'Overseas Contingency Operation'

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,903
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Obama Scraps 'Global War on Terror' for 'Overseas Contingency Operation'

Obama Scraps 'Global War on Terror' for 'Overseas Contingency Operation' - First 100 Days of Presidency - Politics FOXNews.com

The Obama administration has ordered an end to use of the phrase "Global War on Terror," a label adopted by the Bush administration shortly after the September 11, 2001 attacks, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday.

In a memo sent this week from the Defense Department's office of security to Pentagon staffers, members were told, "this administration prefers to avoid using the term 'Long War' or 'Global War on Terror' [GWOT.] Please use 'Overseas Contingency Operation.'"





So in Obama's brave new world, there are no terrorist attacks but "man-caused disasters" and now the GWoT is now called 'Overseas Contingency Operation'. What purpose does this silly newspeak do? Is this to placate the enemy? To soften our stance of defense of our people. What is the point?
 
So in Obama's brave new world, there are no terrorist attacks but "man-caused disasters" and now the GWoT is now called 'Overseas Contingency Operation'. What purpose does this silly newspeak do? Is this to placate the enemy? To soften our stance of defense of our people. What is the point?

I have no idea. This is stupid.
 
So in Obama's brave new world, there are no terrorist attacks but "man-caused disasters" and now the GWoT is now called 'Overseas Contingency Operation'. What purpose does this silly newspeak do? Is this to placate the enemy? To soften our stance of defense of our people. What is the point?
Its to underline The Obama's "New Era of Compassion and Understanding."

After all, if we cannot be compassionate toward those that wuold set off nuclear weapons in our cities, who CAN we be compassionate towards?
 
Does this remind anyone of the 1984 Newspeak dictionary?
 
As silly a name as the "War on Terror" is, it's stuck and it's what people are used to hearing. This isn't going to change anything.
 
It makes sense... You're never going to win a "War on Terror". This sounds less aggressive and provoking. Not that it actually changes anything else...
 
The term "War on Terror" was no more than an attempt by the Neo-cons to pursue their agenda of nation building imperialism....which was about as effective as Reagan's "War on drugs". :doh
 
As silly a name as the "War on Terror" is, it's stuck and it's what people are used to hearing. This isn't going to change anything.

Its possible Obama doesnt plan to change anything about the War on Terror, just change the name to keep the liberals wrapped in blissful ignorance while everything continues.
 
The term "War on Terror" was no more than an attempt by the Neo-cons to pursue their agenda of nation building imperialism....which was about as effective as Reagan's "War on drugs". :doh





So will you be commenting on the current topic, as in the new labels applied to the same activities or will you be bloviating about bush for the foreseeable future? :roll:
 
So will you be commenting on the current topic, as in the new labels applied to the same activities or will you be bloviating about bush for the foreseeable future? :roll:

Hmmmm....lets see. The topic is about scraping the "War on Terror" label....which I seem to have commented on. Your post bloviated on what?
 
Hmmmm....lets see. The topic is about scraping the "War on Terror" label....which I seem to have commented on. Your post bloviated on what?



What do you think of the new terms and the idea behind them to be implemented.


I will wait. :2wave:
 
So in Obama's brave new world, there are no terrorist attacks but "man-caused disasters" and now the GWoT is now called 'Overseas Contingency Operation'. What purpose does this silly newspeak do? Is this to placate the enemy? To soften our stance of defense of our people. What is the point?

I think the name change makes it easier for him down the road to cut off any future operations. Or he may simply keep these operations going while trying to toss the salad of *****fist, "look I ended the war on terror".
 
What do you think of the new terms and the idea behind them to be implemented.


I will wait. :2wave:

I would only HOPE that the new "label" is more than just a continuation of the failed foreign policies ideas that have alientated our allies, destabalized the entire middle East and has tarnished our image as a "leader" in the world community.

I believe that the new administration ushered in with it a new direction towards diplomacy and rebuilding the bridges to our allies that were destroyed by the prior administration.

Will it succeed? Time will tell. But it certainly cannot fail any more than the "war on terror" did.
 
I would only HOPE that the new "label" is more than just a continuation of the failed foreign policies ideas that have alientated our allies, destabalized the entire middle East and has tarnished our image as a "leader" in the world community.

I believe that the new administration ushered in with it a new direction towards diplomacy and rebuilding the bridges to our allies that were destroyed by the prior administration.

Will it succeed? Time will tell. But it certainly cannot fail any more than the "war on terror" did.
So you admit that you have no clue?
 
So you admit that you have no clue?

I don't think anyone does. To pretend that you know the direction that our foreign policy is going to take over the next year or year(s) would be ridiculous. Obama has said what he plans to do...however, no one can predict whether he will be successful in that agenda or not.
 
Last edited:
I would only HOPE that the new "label" is more than just a continuation of the failed foreign policies ideas that have alientated our allies, destabalized the entire middle East and has tarnished our image as a "leader" in the world community.

I believe that the new administration ushered in with it a new direction towards diplomacy and rebuilding the bridges to our allies that were destroyed by the prior administration.

Will it succeed? Time will tell. But it certainly cannot fail any more than the "war on terror" did.



We just sent 17k troops to afghanistan. What are we doing differently?
 
Sugar coating it is going to cause all the smart people get fed up. The name change isn't really working for Xe so I doubt it will work on the War on Being Scared. They namers should have called it the War on Insurgents. Would have made my man Ron Paul think twice about running as a Libertarian in a Republicans body.

Insurgent

1. a person who rises in forcible opposition to lawful authority, esp. a person who engages in armed resistance to a government or to the execution of its laws; rebel.
2. a member of a section of a political party that revolts against the methods or policies of the party.
State official apologizes to candidates for militia report by ‘fusion center’ | The Columbia Daily Tribune - Columbia, MO
 
Last edited:
We just sent 17k troops to afghanistan. What are we doing differently?

That's why I said that I HOPE that we will take a different direction and that it is not simply a new label on the same failed old ideas.

I hope that Obama does not adopt the "Game plan" of the last administration, i.e., "Do the same thing over and over and hope for different results"...but I'm not sure that he won't.

It should come as no surprise to anyone that we just sent 17k troops to Afghanistan. Obama long said that he would do that. Beyond that...I will hold my breath and hope that Obama actually charts a new course.
 
That's why I said that I HOPE that we will take a different direction and that it is not simply a new label on the same failed old ideas.

I hope that Obama does not adopt the "Game plan" of the last administration, i.e., "Do the same thing over and over and hope for different results"...but I'm not sure that he won't.

Can you argue that he has not followed the same game plan..

Did the FISA law get repealed?

Are the troops home yet?


It should come as no surprise to anyone that we just sent 17k troops to Afghanistan. Obama long said that he would do that. Beyond that...I will hold my breath and hope that Obama actually charts a new course.



YOu may pass out.....:lol:
 
And on another note, Obama now refers to 9/11 as an "aeronautical mishap".
 
It makes sense... You're never going to win a "War on Terror". This sounds less aggressive and provoking.
Yes... because we'd hate to further provoke the people that already hate us enough that they are willing to blow themslevses up in an effort to kill as many of us as they can.

Not that it actually changes anything else...
Changing the name does not.
But to think The Obama will not change the war from what it was under GWB is just silly.
 
Can you argue that he has not followed the same game plan..

Did the FISA law get repealed?

Are the troops home yet?






YOu may pass out.....:lol:

I very well may. As I said, I am cautiously optimistic that Obama will follow through with his foreign policy ideas. I am hoping (perhaps against hope) that Obama will display that he is not just a typical politician who's agenda was simply rhetoric to get elected. I think it is still too early to tell what direction our foreign policy will take. Obama hasn't even been office 3 months. I would like to see Obama take very broad steps to repeal the mislabeled "Patriot" act, but doubt that he will. I have already seen him backtrack on the timetable for getting us out of Iraq which I hope does not continue to be a pattern. That's why I say that at this point, I'm taking a wait and see approach.
 
I very well may. As I said, I am cautiously optimistic that Obama will follow through with his foreign policy ideas. I am hoping (perhaps against hope) that Obama will display that he is not just a typical politician who's agenda was simply rhetoric to get elected. I think it is still too early to tell what direction our foreign policy will take. Obama hasn't even been office 3 months. I would like to see Obama take very broad steps to repeal the mislabeled "Patriot" act, but doubt that he will. I have already seen him backtrack on the timetable for getting us out of Iraq which I hope does not continue to be a pattern. That's why I say that at this point, I'm taking a wait and see approach.




First 100 days sets the agenda. We are approaching that. How much longer do you need?
 
Back
Top Bottom