# Greenwald: "Endless war is official US policy" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 13, 2014, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209 "2014-10-13T16:11:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/1 "2014-10-13T16:11:30Z")
"In May, 2013, the Senate Armed Services Committee held a hearing on whether it should revise the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF). A committee member asked a senior Pentagon official, Assistant Secretary Michael Sheehan, how long the war on terror would last; his reply: “At least 10 to 20 years.” At least. A Pentagon spokesperson confirmed afterward “that Sheehan meant the conflict is likely to last 10 to 20 more years from today — atop the 12 years that the conflict has already lasted.” " From The Intercept: > **[Key Democrats, Led by Hillary Clinton, Leave No doubt that Endless War is...](https://theintercept.com/2014/10/07/key-democrats-led-hillary-clinton-leave-doubt-endless-war-u-s-doctrine/)** > > Long before Americans were introduced to the new 9/11 era super-villains called ISIS and Khorasan, senior Obama officials were openly and explicitly stating that America’s “war on terror,” already 12 years old, would last at... The claim is that permanent ongoing low level war is the new norm and will continue with no geographical limits for at likely 20 years more. I can’t find any fault with the claim and its one of the most depressing things I’ve ever read to think its likely that in my entire life remaining I’ll never be free of the bullshit security theatre, the endless war on an abstract concept. I can only be reminded of the old sixties slogan “bombing for peace is like fucking for virginity”. I can’t see any way out of this, there is too much entrenched self interest in keeping the war machine going forever. can anyone see a way out? or is anyone going to defend this as justifiable and “good” policy? does anyone actually believe that there can ever be an end to the “war on terror” given the current path? ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/2 "2014-10-13T16:25:17Z")
I’m not sure of you age, but unfortunately this is not new. Bush II declared war on “terrorism”, which is in effect a war with no end. Obama’s solution has not been to end the war, but mostly to make it more economically sustainable – hence the drone strikes. ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/3 "2014-10-13T16:30:32Z")
It not new but Greenwald’s article is a very succinct statement of the fact that BOTH parties have this as official policy. I’ve never seen that explicitly stated so clearly. ---
**Author:** ![Steken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e274bd/32.png) [@Steken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steken)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/4 "2014-10-13T16:30:43Z")
Well now, is it unthinkable that a future President, two or six or ten years hence, will pull the plug and bring the boys home? ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/5 "2014-10-13T16:36:11Z")
With drones, you don’t send out boys that need to be brought home. ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/6 "2014-10-13T16:42:16Z")
> [@Steken](#): > > Well now, is it unthinkable that a future President, two or six or ten years hence, will pull the plug and bring the boys home? Did you read the article? Its unthinkable under the current two party political system. Give me a realistic path for how a candidate can be elected on a platform to end the war on terror and then ACTUALLY DO IT, once the lobbyists from Raytheon, Lockheed Martin and Northup Grumman explain the facts of life to the new Mr President. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/7 "2014-10-13T17:16:28Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > I’m not sure of you age, but unfortunately this is not new. Bush II declared war on “terrorism”, which is in effect a war with no end. Obama’s solution has not been to end the war, but mostly to make it more economically sustainable – hence the drone strikes. I seem to recall that W always called it the war on “terror”. A war on an emotion itself. I’ve made a point of concealing my fear of spiders lest some drone bomb my ass. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/8 "2014-10-13T17:30:55Z")
I think this illustrates why we shouldn’t be using war as a metaphor. It’s fine to have a ongoing government program directed against poverty or crime or terrorism but I think it’s a bad idea to call these programs wars. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/9 "2014-10-13T17:37:44Z")
You would prefer what… that we just _ignore_ the continued threat of international terrorism for the sake of “bringing the boys home”? Is “ending the war” a goal in and of itself that trumps actually achieving our purposes for engaging the enemy? ISIS isn’t going to pack up and go home just because we don’t feel like lifting a finger to fight them. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/10 "2014-10-13T17:45:27Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > You would prefer what… that we just _ignore_ the continued threat of international terrorism for the sake of “bringing the boys home”? Is “ending the war” a goal in and of itself that trumps actually achieving our purposes for engaging the enemy? We have no purpose besides killing for the sake of killing. It’s just another Christian/Muslim crusade, another round of meaningless killing. Nor is what we are doing going to do anything but create more enemies, both terrorist and otherwise. > [@Smapti](#): > > ISIS isn’t going to pack up and go home just because we don’t feel like lifting a finger to fight them. And? ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/11 "2014-10-13T17:46:38Z")
Let me use an analogy. Your body’s immune system is always 24/7 in “endless war” against pathogens. Why? Because germs are always present. Your immune response isn’t the problem. The germs are. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/12 "2014-10-13T17:47:53Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > You would prefer what… that we just _ignore_ the continued threat of international terrorism for the sake of “bringing the boys home”? Is “ending the war” a goal in and of itself that trumps actually achieving our purposes for engaging the enemy? > > ISIS isn’t going to pack up and go home just because we don’t feel like lifting a finger to fight them. Wow! This post is hereby nominated for the “Most Total and Complete Failure to Understand What Is Written Before Replying” Award! ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/13 "2014-10-13T17:48:24Z")
> [@The Metaphysics of Materialism](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-metaphysics-of-materialism/88392/181): > > And? And what happens if ISIS manages to legitimately take control of Iraq or Syria or both? What happens to Kuwait? What happens to Saudi Arabia? What happens to Lebanon? What happens to Israel? What happens to the international economy? Do you think America exists in a vacuum and that nothing that happens there affects anything that happens here unless we stick our nose in it? ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/14 "2014-10-13T17:49:37Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Wow! This post is hereby nominated for the “Most Total and Complete Failure to Understand What Is Written Before Replying” Award! So explain why “endless war” is an inherently bad thing regardless of any extenuating circumstances, then. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/15 "2014-10-13T17:50:42Z")
Let me use another analogy. Law enforcement is always 24/7 in “endless war” against crime. Why? Because crime always present. The police presence isn’t the problem. The criminals are. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/16 "2014-10-13T17:51:04Z")
NM. ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/17 "2014-10-13T17:54:32Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > You would prefer what… that we just _ignore_ the continued threat of international terrorism for the sake of “bringing the boys home”? Yes. “International terrorism” is not that big of a threat. A nuisance, at best. The whole goddamn “war” is a distraction. We are at war with the Oceania. We have always been at war with the Oceania. > [@](#): > > Is “ending the war” a goal in and of itself that trumps actually achieving our purposes for engaging the enemy? What purposes are those? People who bomb buildings and hijack planes are criminals. The police and justice system were made for people like that. It’s giving them entirely too much legitimacy to call them soldiers in a “war”. ISIS is a paramilitary force. Not really terrorists at all. It might be worth waging a war against them if Syrian or Iraqi politics had anything to do with our country or citizens, and we could suss out who the good guys are, and how exactly we would benefit from fighting the bad guys. It might be worth fighting them if they were committing some kind of genocide. But sending a bunch of soldiers into Iraq to blow shit up in order stop a bunch of other soldiers in Iraq from blowing shit up won’t help anyone at all and serves no purpose. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/18 "2014-10-13T17:59:22Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > “International terrorism” is not that big of a threat. A nuisance, at best. Well, technically, the 9/11 attacks only killed 0.001% of people in the United States that day, so… > [@DrCube](#): > > ISIS is a paramilitary force…It might be worth fighting them if they were committing some kind of genocide. I thought they had been specifically killing Christians? ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/19 "2014-10-13T18:02:36Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > “International terrorism” is not that big of a threat. A nuisance, at best. I’m sure the families of the 9/11 victims will be comforted to know that what they went through was a nuisance at best. > [@](#): > > What purposes are those? To destroy those organizations that intend to harm America, Americans or the allies of America, to disrupt international commerce, or to foster an environment that is harmful to peaceful international cooperation. > [@](#): > > People who bomb buildings and hijack planes are criminals. The police and justice system were made for people like that. It’s giving them entirely too much legitimacy to call them soldiers in a “war”. So we should… knock on ISIS’ door and serve them a bench warrant? > [@](#): > > ISIS is a paramilitary force. Not really terrorists at all. A “paramilitary force” that executes journalists, practices slavery, crucifies people, and has conquered a large swath of territory belonging to a US ally. What is the difference between ISIS and the Taliban? Or the Viet Cong? Or the Army of Northern Virginia? > [@](#): > > It might be worth waging a war against them if Syrian or Iraqi politics had anything to do with our country or citizens Which it _does_, since we created the current Iraqi government, they’re our allies, and we’re responsible for the power vacuum that allowed ISIS to rise up. They’re our mess and we have an obligation to clean it up. > [@](#): > > and we could suss out who the good guys are, and how exactly we would benefit from fighting the bad guys. The good guys are us. The bad guys are anyone who has a problem with us being the good guys. > [@](#): > > It might be worth fighting them if they were committing some kind of genocide. Which they _are_ - against Yazidis, Kurds, Arab Christians, Shiites, and pretty much everyone else who doesn’t fall into line with their fanatical line of thought. > [@](#): > > But sending a bunch of soldiers into Iraq to blow shit up in order stop a bunch of other soldiers in Iraq from blowing shit up won’t help anyone at all and serves no purpose. Tell all the people ISIS has killed that saving their lives would have served no purpose. ---
**Author:** ![Steken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e274bd/32.png) [@Steken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steken)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2014, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209/20 "2014-10-13T18:09:10Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > With drones, you don’t send out boys that need to be brought home. Right you are. Of course, I meant “bring the boys home” as in “end the war(s).” > [@coremelt](#): > > Did you read the article? Its unthinkable under the current two party political system. Give me a realistic path for how a candidate can be elected on a platform to end the war on terror and then ACTUALLY DO IT, once the lobbyists from Raytheon, Lockheed Martin and Northup Grumman explain the facts of life to the new Mr President. Yes, I read the article. It’s really good, I think - as an analysis of American policy at this specific moment in time, when both parties do indeed seem committed to the idea of “endless wars.” But here’s the thing: Politicians have been known to change their mind about this sort of thing. Reagan pulled out of Lebanon. Clinton pulled out of Somalia. Obama pulled out of Iraq, at least partly (before getting pulled in again). Which is why I don’t think it _entirely unthinkable_ that a future President, within a decade or less, might decide to pull the plug and bring the boys (and drones!) home, for real this time. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greenwald-endless-war-is-official-us-policy/701209.md?page=2)