Get PJ Media on your Apple

PJM Lifestyle

Putting the War into the ‘War on Terror’

Life is no game, but we should still play to win.

by
Walter Hudson

Bio

May 23, 2013 - 8:00 am
Page 1 of 4  Next ->   View as Single Page

Our grandfathers ran around as children playing cowboys and Indians. Our fathers played cops and robbers. In the digital age, we have video-game iterations of the same dichotomy like Counter-Strike, a classic and frequently remade title featuring frantic objective-based gunplay between terrorists and the counterforces employed to stop them.

A mainstay of masculine entertainment, the terrorist stands in place of the generic black-hatted villain of yesteryear, all but tying damsels to railroad tracks. As antagonists go, terrorists come readymade, requiring little to no explanation for their menace. They hail from somewhere exotic, believe something bizarre, and destroy as a means to their chosen end. Often, we don’t even care what fuels their violence so long as we get to shoot back. As I think back on terrorist films I’ve watched multiple times, like True Lies or Air Force One, I couldn’t tell you exactly why the bad guys were bad or what they hoped to accomplish. It didn’t really matter. They were there to rally our hate and earn a satisfying death at the hands of our hero.

For a moment, the reality of September 11, 2001, and the subsequent “War on Terror” paused all of that. Suddenly, terrorists weren’t to be taken lightly as make-believe villains. What fueled their violence became a matter of grave consequence. No matter our political perspective, how we thought of terrorists changed dramatically.

For the Left, certainly during the Bush years, the terrorist became the pitiable personification of American imperialism, the sins of a nation come home to roost. For the neoconservative faction of the Right, as institutionalized by the Bush administration and its supporting organizations, the terrorist became the next advent of the Evil Empire, a virulent boogeyman lurking around every corner much like the Cold War spy before him.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
Get us out of the U.N. and get the U.N. out of the U.S. for starters. It's been since long before 2001 or even 1979 that we have quit fighting our wars to win the war. It started in 1948 with the creation of the U.N. Since then we have yet to decisively win a war. Although we trounced Saddam in getting him out of Kuwait, he was still in power when we left. Then when we did finally run him out, we set about winning hearts and minds of the Iraqi people rather than their unconditional surrender. Ditto in Afghanistan. Until we fight to win the war and worry about hearts and minds later, we will never win.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
An excellent, lucid post.

The question becomes one of will, and how can the will be exerted on behalf of the American people? Any honest look at Islam is stopped by cries of "phobia". There are none on the political landscape able to use the correct language to describe what we face.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (15)
All Comments   (15)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Mr. Hudson correctly points to Iran as a state sponsor of terrorism. But he names no others, because there are none, except Syria, Iran's satellite. The Sunni terrorists of Al-Qaeda and its affiliates were not created by Iran, though Iran and Syria have sometimes aided them.

Nor by any other state. Sunni jihadism is "private sector", drawing on the lakes of money held by sympathetic Saudis and other oil-country residents. It also draws on the extreme religious attitudes propagated by the Saudi government's missionary works.

But the Saudi government works with the U.S. against Al-Qaeda.

There are elements in the Pakistani government which have supported terrorism, but there are other elements which fight terrorism. Pakistan has lost thousands of soldiers killed fighting the Taliban, and helped us capture AQ leaders. But Pakistan cannot even suppress its internal terrorists, due to its political weakness.

The Madrid, London, and Boston bombers were all free-lancers. Such attacks are eruptions of an attitude, not actions of a state.

The Sunni jihadist threat comes from a small number of men, supported and sheltered by a larger group, which in turn have the generaized sympathy of many more - enough to paralyze Moslem governments.

These government are not enemies, they are unreliable neutrals or allies.

Removing Iran would be an excellent idea, but not sufficient.
38 weeks ago
38 weeks ago Link To Comment
What? And all I thought we were supposed to do is understand these poor lost little terrorists. We are supposed to actually do something other than hug them? My goodness!
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
Terror is a tactic and one can never wage war on a tactic. But it does help to understand the ideology of who one is fighting. HOWEVER, it is this piece of critical info which is eviscerated from the war effort, and punishable (by the military, no less, re the orders of Obama Inc!) to those who teach about its CORE essence - http://adinakutnicki.com/2013/06/01/u-s-chairman-of-joint-chiefs-of-staff-fires-a-decorated-commander-the-costs-of-teaching-the-truth-about-islamic-jihad-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/

Adina Kutnicki, Israel http://adinakutnicki.com/about/
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
The theme song for Obama's era will be;
"When Johnny Becomes Homeless Again, Hurrah; HURRAH!!!
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
Saudi Arabia is the single greatest threat to Democracy and stability for the world. And yet not even this website can bring itself to mention their name as the funding agent for global Terror.
We have lost the war before it started because we cannot face realities
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
"At the time, Ayn Rand said that if we did not act with force immediately, we would never live it down. We still haven’t"

Back then , I was not ready to stand at ground zero in nuke war with the Soviets and test my theory I enter instant paradise as i am ready to do today being less risk averse
What it seem to me USA twin with China and now want to get closer to Russia. How we going to have nuke war this threesome orgy so it seems?
Kerry is working with Russia to have Assad removed . if that does not work England and France the new frisky and feisty sens weapons to the rebels in Syria. Then Obama keeps his peacemaker image and we do not get any more terrorist attacks except home grown terror and England and France must turn step on the toes of extremist in their own nations so no more holy temples of Islam are burnt down and Islam people in Europe become like USA Islam people ,lambs that obey my laws with deep respect for my great power and authority
I implore you , as servant of the Emperor do not yell fire in crowded movie and disturb my peace
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
footnote
Which brings me to Iran. They still claim to have democracy. Weakening their grip in Syria is the best way to deal with the Mullah's curse on their people as of today.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
"The essence of a proper American war policy is an ability to clearly identify the enemies that threaten this country, and the willingness to do what is necessary to end the threat with minimum loss of American life and liberty."

Epstein is right of course, but due to political correctness, and that fact that this existential threat (radical Islam) is masquerading as a psuedo religion, there is no way to win this "war" let alone fight it properly. I know others will argue that radical Islam is an oxymoron, since practicing it as the Koran instructs and iman exort you to, is by default radical and a threat to everyone's peaceful existence. So what can we do about it, if we are unwilling to fight to win, or even identify and acknowlege the threat?

How about electing leaders who actually understand there is a threat, and who aren't embarrassed to represent the interests of the U.S....the kind that actually love this country and want it to succeed.

45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
>While it is true that modern terrorists and insurgents don’t necessarily wear the uniform or fly the flag of a particular state, certainly they operate as the clients of particular states.<

That's, at best, a stretch. Were the Boston Bombers "clients" of Iran? How about Major Hassan? The only thing they had in common was that they were muslims. So do we bomb Tehran, or Mecca?
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
Bomb Islmia in it's entirety.
It's only tit for tat.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
yes.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
Get us out of the U.N. and get the U.N. out of the U.S. for starters. It's been since long before 2001 or even 1979 that we have quit fighting our wars to win the war. It started in 1948 with the creation of the U.N. Since then we have yet to decisively win a war. Although we trounced Saddam in getting him out of Kuwait, he was still in power when we left. Then when we did finally run him out, we set about winning hearts and minds of the Iraqi people rather than their unconditional surrender. Ditto in Afghanistan. Until we fight to win the war and worry about hearts and minds later, we will never win.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
An excellent, lucid post.

The question becomes one of will, and how can the will be exerted on behalf of the American people? Any honest look at Islam is stopped by cries of "phobia". There are none on the political landscape able to use the correct language to describe what we face.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
What We need right now is Obamaphobia; Congressophobia; FBIophobia; NSAophobia; JusticeDeptophobia; D.C.ophobia;
And most important; DEMOCRATOPHOBIA.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
Notice D.C.ophobia has an internet link???????
I didn't put it there!!!!!!!
I have never seen it before!!!!!!
I thought I was making it up.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
View All