Faux War (Letter to Editor NWATimes)

[Hogeye]

Dear Editor,

John Terry says (NWATimes editorial Mar. 24), "The war on terror is real." Gene Lyons says, "It is simply impossible to wage war on an abstract noun." Who is right? Let's apply a little critical thinking and find out.

First we need to define terms. In this context, "war" is armed conflict between two organizations. Merriam-Webster puts it this way: "war - a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations." Neither gentleman is using the term figuratively to mean some vague struggle. Terry makes this perfectly clear when he talks about WWII, "kill or be killed," and the acceptability of killing innocents ("collateral damage.")

But "terror" is not a political state, nor even an organization. "Terror" is an abstraction, a concept referring to an emotional state ("a state of intense fear") or a type of action - "violent or destructive acts (as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government." Thus, by simply applying definitions we can judge the veracity of Terry's claim that "The war on terror is real." The claim is false. War by definition does not apply to emotional states or means or problems.

Similarly, we can reject as nonsense other similar notions, such as war on poverty, war on drugs, and war on crime. There can logically be a struggle against these things, but there is no war in the meaningful, literal sense. These faux "wars" are merely misleading slogans - shibboleths designed to elicit an emotional response rather than clear-headed thinking. Thus, it is no surprise that such fake "wars" almost always amount to a blank check on government power, the purses and often the very lives of the people forced to pay the costs.

Hogeye Bill

[Dardedar]

DAR
When you write your inchoate rants you regularly spam people in the community with unrequested copies.

Sometimes these spammed emails include close-up photographs, or links to close-up photographs, of your anus. You have also sent this vile material to my fiancee.

In September I asked you to take me off your email list. Yet this one, like a chicken barn stench, floated in yesterday. Why do you not honor this simple and reasonable request?

D.

[Savonarola]

Please settle private disputes via either private messages or another medium.

--Savonarola, Politics Moderator

[Barbara Fitzpatrick]

Larry Woodall put out a call to any of the Rapid Responders to take on John Terry's letter. Hogeye started out with a very good response. If fact, if he'd stopped at the 2nd sentence of the last paragraph ("There can logically be a struggle against these things, but there is no war in the meaningful, literal sense") and wrapped up with an exhortation to use policing methods to address a policing problem (the crime of terrorist acts), I would have said that, for once, I agree wholeheartedly with him.

[Hogeye]

Hey, Barbara, you should put your letters on this forum. You write some really good ones. Your comment above had me chuckling, since I had the same reaction to one of your recent anti-war letters. I agreed with everything you wrote 100% until the very last part, where you naively called for people to beg their rulers to reform. Obviously, we have different evaluations of the institution of State: I think it's the problem, you think it's the solution.