The 'War on Terror' is Over! Yipeeee!

Newsflash – The War is Over!

There it was in the liberal rag, the New York Times on July 27, 2005: Officials from President Bush’s administration have decided to “re-brand” the “War on Terror”.

The article went on to say “Administration and Pentagon officials say the revamped campaign has grown out of meetings of President George W. Bush's senior national security advisers that began in January, and it reflects the evolution in Bush's own thinking nearly four years after the Sept. 11 attack.

Evidently, the new brand name to replace “War on Terror” is probably going to be “The global Struggle Against Violent Extremism”. However, It is possible that the marketers are still working on it because on July 29th Donald Rumsfeld called the previously “War on Terror” branded product
“Struggle Against the Enemies of Freedom”.

If the Bush administration is truly having a difficult time with coming up with a better catchphrase for their military aggression, my personal favorite is “The Crusade to Kill the Evil-doers”. It has pizzazz and I made it up myself!

Where is the Parade?

When past wars ended in our beloved country, we had parades, didn’t we? Where is the ticker tape parade? Where are the people taking to the streets to celebrate? Where is our President declaring a national holiday to honor the victory?

Is it possible that there is no victory because there was no war?

The Undeclared War on the Undefined Terror

For years I have had my own personal “struggle against logical ignorance” when I have tried to convince virtually no one that there is no such thing as a “War on Terror”.

The United States Constitution and the War Powers Act of Congress clearly defines the process and rules for declaring war. Like with the Vietnam Conflict, war was never declared.

If this even was a pseudo-war, what kind of enemy is terror or terrorism? Why was not the name Al-Qaeda used in the campaign? There have been numerous groups of people who have used terrorism tactics in the past: Black Panthers, Symbionese Liberation Army, Hamas, IRA, Red Brigade and McVeigh/Nichols. None of these groups had a non-war declared on them.

Lastly, what kind of war is it that does not have any defined criteria for success or winning? I am aware that our president told us that this was a different kind of war, but I can only trust and accept a certain degree of abstract ideas. To quote the late great philosopher Johnnie Cochran, “If it don’t fit, it’s full of shit!”

If the “War on Terror” wasn’t really a war and terror really wasn’t an enemy then what was it?

After reading that the Bush administration has decided to “re-brand” the “War on Terror” and after understanding that it is their intent to “re-tool” the campaign, it became clear to me: The “War on Terror” was a marketing campaign.

What is “re-branding” and why are you doing it to our war?

I am a business graduate and I took marketing & sales courses. I remember well and I have a good understanding of the marketing process called “branding”.

It is mind boggling to think that “War on Terror” is a brand name for the Bush administration much like “Air Jordan” is a brand for Nike and “Walkman” is a brand for Sony. Something cannot be “re-branded” unless it was first branded.

If “War on Terror” has been identified by it’s creators as needing to be “re-branded” then it must mean that the war is really a product. If the product’s marketing campaign has to be “re-tooled” then it must mean that sales are down and the objective is to create a new “packaging” to improve product sales. Will Americans buy the new “brand” or will they recognize that it is the same old product in a new package?

Is our patriotism being manipulated here?

It’s not news until FOXNews tells you its news!

I realize that the “War on Terror” being over has not been reported yet on FOXNews. I also know that until FOXNews leads them to follow them, MS/NBC and CNN will not report it.

If you are someone who wants to verify these facts about the re-branding of “War On Terror”, you can do a google search on the terms “re-branding” with “war”. You should get 68,000+ hits.

Because I cannot link to the archives of the New York Times, I can’t link to the August 27th article. However, I can link to this excellent article in the
International Herald Tribune:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/07/26/news/terror.php

Why would FOXNews, CNN, MS/NBC, ABC, CBS & NBC decide to not report the re-branding of the “War on Terror”? I strongly suspect that it is because they have invested all of their credibility in it being a reality.

Conclusion

The “War on Terror” is over because it was a slick marketing campaign instead of a real war. Thousands of fine US soldiers and 10’s of thousands of innocent civilians have died needlessly. Close to $200,000,000,000.00 of US tax dollars have been spent with most of it going to the military weapon and support corporations.

Will the American people receive any closure for their patriotic trust and support? No. There will be no victory celebrations and no treaties with the enemy. There will only be a subtle changing of the brand name of a marketing slogan. Slowly and with little notice, the termonolgy will change. Goodbye “War on Terror!” Hello “The global Struggle Against Violent Extremism.”

As General Douglas MacArthur once said “Old brand names never die, they just slowly fade away!”