The collapse of terrorism as a political expediency

[ngant17]

Now that _Bush is on the way out, is it safe to say that terrorism is going to wane away or at least be put in a normal context again? We've always had terrorism to a lesser or greater degree in the past.

When the British army burned down the White House in the War of 1812 (actually it was in 1814), it was certainly terrorism as we know it and call it today but we didn't coin and mass-market the word back then, at least it was never being used in the mundane context we have it now. We got over it. It was probably helpful that Faux News didn't exist to mass-market the word back then, classic newspaper 'yellow journalism' was still a century away (of course, the jingoist rhetoric was always there), and conglomerate-owned TV networks had yet to come to life almost a half-century after that.

Yes, I understand how communist threats were great business especially when RayGun was serving his MIC (military-incdustrial complex) masters, it certainly peaked on his watch, but the end of the USSR in the early 1980's made the whole idea bankrupt and there was even talk about a 'peace dividend' inside the the US for a very short time. That didn't go far.

Terrorism is marketed to be self-perpetuating, or is it? Maybe it depends on who will control the White House and the political process in 2008. The Iraq war is at $450 billion as I write these words, and that is only a portion of the Great US War on Terrorism. Sounds like the Great Patriotic War of the USSR, except this is a completely phony war and no Americans are threatened except by military psy-ops and deceipt in high office.

[illinoisprogressive]

1. It's the Henny Penny syndrome. You can only say the sky is falling so many times.

[AndyTiedye]

2. That Just Means They'll Do Another MIHOP Soon