Comments on: Branding the “Long War” http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/ public domain playground. friendly entities welcome. Sun, 22 Nov 2009 15:16:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Greg http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-11032 Greg Thu, 09 Mar 2006 01:54:05 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-11032 Hi Tim, This new 'marketing strategy' happened mid-last year. As usual, Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert ripped it up on the Daily Show - definitely worth the download (from the excellent Crooks and Liars): http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/07/28.html#a4201 When Rummy gets the line wrong, it betrays how conscious a choice it is for these guys to repeat the talking points. Politics these days is just marketing. Peace and Respect, Greg Hi Tim,

This new ‘marketing strategy’ happened mid-last year. As usual, Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert ripped it up on the Daily Show - definitely worth the download (from the excellent Crooks and Liars):

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/07/28.html#a4201

When Rummy gets the line wrong, it betrays how conscious a choice it is for these guys to repeat the talking points. Politics these days is just marketing.

Peace and Respect,
Greg

]]> By: alistair http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-10950 alistair Tue, 07 Mar 2006 02:58:41 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-10950 this is the game that nations have always played. it is just that the information is coming faster and there is more of it. that doesn`t mean that the information is any more accurate though. just more. and the reactions tend to be stronger also. which keeps people divided. this is the game that nations have always played. it is just that the information is coming faster and there is more of it. that doesn`t mean that the information is any more accurate though. just more. and the reactions tend to be stronger also. which keeps people divided.

]]> By: Tim Boucher http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-10947 Tim Boucher Mon, 06 Mar 2006 21:47:05 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-10947 I would love to see more info on this. Thanks James I would love to see more info on this. Thanks James

]]> By: james http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-10946 james Mon, 06 Mar 2006 21:31:54 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-10946 This whole issue was reported last year in U.S. News & World Report-- it pays off to subscribe to right-wing rags... Know your enemy, I always say. And yes, it was a conscious decision to go from "War on Terror" to "War on Extremism"... I'll look through my archives, see if I can find the issue that specifically reports this. This whole issue was reported last year in U.S. News & World Report– it pays off to subscribe to right-wing rags… Know your enemy, I always say.

And yes, it was a conscious decision to go from “War on Terror” to “War on Extremism”… I’ll look through my archives, see if I can find the issue that specifically reports this.

]]> By: Dan http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-10943 Dan Mon, 06 Mar 2006 18:23:22 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-10943 I wrote about this, shortly after Mr Pace's rather horrifying speech: http://taognostic.org/2006/02/18/the-long-war/ I finished my post by commenting on this paragraph, which I thought was hilarious: “We in the defence department feel <strong>fairly confident that our forces will be called on</strong> to be engaged somewhere in the world in the next decade where they’re currently not engaged, but we have <b>no idea whatsoever</b> where that might be, when that might be or in what circumstances that they might be engaged.” I wrote about this, shortly after Mr Pace’s rather horrifying speech:

http://taognostic.org/2006/02/18/the-long-war/

I finished my post by commenting on this paragraph, which I thought was hilarious:

“We in the defence department feel fairly confident that our forces will be called on to be engaged somewhere in the world in the next decade where they’re currently not engaged, but we have no idea whatsoever where that might be, when that might be or in what circumstances that they might be engaged.”

]]> By: hebrides http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-10939 hebrides Mon, 06 Mar 2006 17:51:41 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-10939 We are at war with Eurasia. We have always been at war with Eurasia. Eastasia is our ally. We are in a long war against extremists. We have always been in a long war against extremists... Osama is our Emmanuel Goldstein. They've been slowly leading us down the primrose path towards accepting an eternal war on anyone at any time. W's much criticized comments about us being on a "crusade" was just a test run. They didn't give up that line of thinking, they just decided it would take more marketing and mass pyschological programming to get everyone to acquiesce to it. By "they" eye mean the Party, of course. :) There's far too much money in the business of war and the vast majority of our other industries appear to be dependent on that primary business. More and more Ahriman of the ol' persian belief-system represents to kmee more a specific type of adversarial entropic force--one that aims to the dissipation of souls in favor of lifeless mechanism/object. It aims for puppets and animatrons against organic, cooperative and yet still independent, conscious being. the appearance of life, rather than life itself--which is far too chaotic, far too messy and no longer amenable to the bottom line. Skidoo. We are at war with Eurasia. We have always been at war with Eurasia. Eastasia is our ally.

We are in a long war against extremists. We have always been in a long war against extremists…

Osama is our Emmanuel Goldstein.

They’ve been slowly leading us down the primrose path towards accepting an eternal war on anyone at any time. W’s much criticized comments about us being on a “crusade” was just a test run. They didn’t give up that line of thinking, they just decided it would take more marketing and mass pyschological programming to get everyone to acquiesce to it. By “they” eye mean the Party, of course. :)

There’s far too much money in the business of war and the vast majority of our other industries appear to be dependent on that primary business. More and more Ahriman of the ol’ persian belief-system represents to kmee more a specific type of adversarial entropic force–one that aims to the dissipation of souls in favor of lifeless mechanism/object. It aims for puppets and animatrons against organic, cooperative and yet still independent, conscious being. the appearance of life, rather than life itself–which is far too chaotic, far too messy and no longer amenable to the bottom line.

Skidoo.

]]> By: jp http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-10936 jp Mon, 06 Mar 2006 17:19:59 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-10936 it's radio free albemuth all over again, baby! where's aramchek when we need em? it’s radio free albemuth all over again, baby! where’s aramchek when we need em?

]]> By: Benway http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-10925 Benway Mon, 06 Mar 2006 09:08:24 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-10925 Sorry about the diabolical spelig Sorry about the diabolical spelig

]]> By: Benway http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-10924 Benway Mon, 06 Mar 2006 09:07:18 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-10924 And I say again they announced plans to attack China PUBLICALLY! Coupled with previous statements that they would use 'safe' nukes! And I say again they announced plans to attack China PUBLICALLY! Coupled with previous statements that they would use ’safe’ nukes!

]]> By: Benway http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-10923 Benway Mon, 06 Mar 2006 09:05:31 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-10923 They announced World War III. They announced World War III.

]]> By: Tim Boucher http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-10913 Tim Boucher Mon, 06 Mar 2006 07:29:14 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-10913 Holy shit... this is really the beginning of a whole new fucked up era. I'm really astonished by all this. Holy shit… this is really the beginning of a whole new fucked up era. I’m really astonished by all this.

]]> By: Kabir http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-10911 Kabir Mon, 06 Mar 2006 07:21:33 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-10911 <em>In another significant terminological shift, the Pentagon document defines the main enemy not as terrorists, but rather as “violent extremists” or merely “extremists.”</em> http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/feb2006/pent-f09.shtml In another significant terminological shift, the Pentagon document defines the main enemy not as terrorists, but rather as “violent extremists” or merely “extremists.”

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/feb2006/pent-f09.shtml

]]> By: Kabir http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-10910 Kabir Mon, 06 Mar 2006 07:20:32 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-10910 The message from General Peter Pace, the chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff, was apocalyptic. "We are at a critical time in the history of this great country and find ourselves challenged in ways we did not expect. We face a ruthless enemy intent on destroying our way of life and an uncertain future." Gen Pace was endorsing the Pentagon's four-yearly strategy review, presented to Congress last week. <em>The report sets out a plan for prosecuting what the the Pentagon describes in the preface as "The Long War", which replaces the "war on terror". The long war represents more than just a linguistic shift: it reflects the ongoing development of US strategic thinking since the September 11 attacks.</em> Looking beyond the Iraq and Afghan battlefields, US commanders envisage a war unlimited in time and space against global Islamist extremism. "The struggle ... may well be fought in dozens of other countries simultaneously and for many years to come," the report says. http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,1710062,00.html The message from General Peter Pace, the chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff, was apocalyptic. “We are at a critical time in the history of this great country and find ourselves challenged in ways we did not expect. We face a ruthless enemy intent on destroying our way of life and an uncertain future.”

Gen Pace was endorsing the Pentagon’s four-yearly strategy review, presented to Congress last week. The report sets out a plan for prosecuting what the the Pentagon describes in the preface as “The Long War”, which replaces the “war on terror”. The long war represents more than just a linguistic shift: it reflects the ongoing development of US strategic thinking since the September 11 attacks.

Looking beyond the Iraq and Afghan battlefields, US commanders envisage a war unlimited in time and space against global Islamist extremism. “The struggle … may well be fought in dozens of other countries simultaneously and for many years to come,” the report says.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,1710062,00.html

]]> By: Benway http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-10904 Benway Mon, 06 Mar 2006 05:19:50 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-10904 It also reminded me of "The LOng Game" from last year's Doctor Who TV show, which resulted ultimately in the total destruction of the human race. It also reminded me of “The LOng Game” from last year’s Doctor Who TV show, which resulted ultimately in the total destruction of the human race.

]]> By: Benway http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-10903 Benway Mon, 06 Mar 2006 05:18:14 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-10903 It was indeed always "terror" rather than "terrorism", but "the long war" is new. And more grounds for the US people waking up. It was indeed always “terror” rather than “terrorism”, but “the long war” is new. And more grounds for the US people waking up.

]]> By: James Russell http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-10899 James Russell Mon, 06 Mar 2006 03:49:00 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-10899 Hasn't it always been the War On Terror rather than Terrorism? I'm fairly sure I was calling it that myself three or four years ago... Hasn’t it always been the War On Terror rather than Terrorism? I’m fairly sure I was calling it that myself three or four years ago…

]]> By: Benway http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-10896 Benway Sun, 05 Mar 2006 23:58:46 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-10896 I saw an official US government statement which stated the intention of the US to wage war indefinately anywhere deemed necessary icluding in "countries we are not at war with". It used this language. They also outlined contigincy plans to fight China. China was not impressed. Sorry, I can't remember the link. I saw an official US government statement which stated the intention of the US to wage war indefinately anywhere deemed necessary icluding in “countries we are not at war with”. It used this language. They also outlined contigincy plans to fight China. China was not impressed.

Sorry, I can’t remember the link.

]]> By: prnsqlr http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/comment-page-1/#comment-10895 prnsqlr Sun, 05 Mar 2006 23:35:29 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2006/03/05/branding-the-long-war/#comment-10895 It's not isolated. It is a conscious shift on the part of the <a href="http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/050606/6whitehouse.htm" rel="nofollow">National Security Council.</a> Check out the 2nd to last paragraph in <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/22/AR2005042201320.html" rel="nofollow">this</a> article by Jim Hoagland. He frames the change in the same sentence he specifies it. It’s not isolated. It is a conscious shift on the part of the National Security Council.

Check out the 2nd to last paragraph in this article by Jim Hoagland. He frames the change in the same sentence he specifies it.

]]>