Semantics

Well, looks as if the Dems have it all figured out. Maybe if we just eliminate the phrase, the problem will just go away.

The House Armed Services Committee is banishing the global war on terror from the 2008 defense budget.

This is not because the war has been won, lost or even called off, but because the committee’s Democratic leadership doesn’t like the phrase.

A memo for the committee staff, circulated March 27, says the 2008 bill and its accompanying explanatory report that will set defense policy should be specific about military operations and “avoid using colloquialisms.”

The “global war on terror,” a phrase first used by President Bush shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the U.S., should not be used, according to the memo. Also banned is the phrase the “long war,” which military officials began using last year as a way of acknowledging that military operations against terrorist states and organizations would not be wrapped up in a few years.

“There was no political intent in doing this,” said a Democratic aide who asked not to be identified. “We were just trying to avoid catch phrases.”

Yeah, sure. There’s probably snowballs in hell too.

Committee aides, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said dropping or reducing references to the global war on terror could have many purposes, including an effort to be more precise about military operations, but also has a political element involving a disagreement over whether the war in Iraq is part of the effort to combat terrorism or is actually a distraction from fighting terrorists.

This makes a whole lot more sense. How better to distract from the fight against terrorism and focus on the negatives of the campaign in Iraq and Iran. What better way to whack President Bush about the head and shoulders. Also, it allows the Dems to focus on the draw down in Iraq without seeming to be opposed to the overall efforts in the war against terror.