'Long War' and its discontented
I remember sometime between 9/11 and the invasion of Afghanistan, I heard from the D.C. security establishment that the war on terror could last "generations," or "as long as 50 years." And I remember thinking at the time, that's probably not open-ended enough for what these guys really want -- a perpetual stream of cash running through "supplemental" budget appropriations for war profiteers to soak in.
And I think they'll get it with "Long War." Ehsan Ahrari has a very nice piece in the Asia Times on the "Pentagon's latest template":
In the early months of 2005, it was becoming clear that the administration of President George W Bush was getting increasingly dissatisfied with the use of "GWOT", as some identified the "global war on terrorism", since Islamist propagandists argued that it was in reality just a euphemism for America's war against Islam. Last September General Richard Myers, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, used "Long War" in his parting press conference.
"Long War" holds considerable promise of being catchy and martial in tone and and a sound propaganda tool. The "warriors" (not a pejorative phrase) of the Pentagon would also be able to use it compactly in their daily briefings to make their case. Consequently, even before releasing its Quadrennial Defense Review 2005, the Pentagon has initiated its public campaign of popularizing the concept."Read on...