The War on Terror tag is being dropped by the UK Government and Development Secretary Hilary Benn is urging the US to do the same.
Mr Benn said the term, coined by the White House after the 9/11 attacks, made small terrorist groups feel too important.
He will warn that the US rhetoric has given terrorists a "shared identity" and strengthens small disaffected groups with widely differing aims by making them feel part of something "bigger".
He will confirm that British ministers and civil servants have decided to stop using the term.
Speaking in New York, Mr Benn will also urge leaders such as President Bush to find common ground with potential enemies rather than relying on hard military power.
"In the UK, we do not use the phrase 'War on Terror' because we can't win by military means alone, and because this isn't us against one organised enemy with a clear identity and a coherent set of objectives," Mr Benn will tell a meeting organised by the Centre for International Co-operation.
"It is the vast majority of the people in the world - of all nationalities and faiths - against a small number of loose, shifting and disparate groups who have relatively little in common apart from their identification with others who share their distorted view of the world and their idea of being part of something bigger.
"What these groups want is to force their individual and narrow values on others without dialogue, without debate, through violence. And by letting them feel part of something bigger, we give them strength," he will add.
Mr Benn will say that "hard power" alone cannot win the battle against terrorism in an "interconnected world", and a multilateral approach is needed.
"It can certainly win the battle - but without soft power, we cannot win the war that will deliver better governance, sustainable peace and lasting prosperity.
"The fight for the kind of world that most people want can, in the end, only be won in a different battle - a battle of values and ideas."
only when it comes to defending against attacks on Muslims from kuffars and moderate "muslims".
I love how you judged muezzin without even knowing him. Brought a tear to my eye.
nope, nothing wrong unless you carry over that cultural patriotic baggage to keep throwing in other Muslim's face, making them wonder where your loyalty lies.
His loyalty lies with Islam, like mine and yours.
To all members: Stay on topic and quit with personal attacks/name calling.
Someone said to the Prophet, "Pray to God against the idolaters and curse them." The Prophet replied, "I have been sent to show mercy and have not been sent to curse." (Muslim)
I love how you judged muezzin without even knowing him. Brought a tear to my eye.
His loyalty lies with Islam, like mine and yours.
To all members: Stay on topic and quit with personal attacks/name calling.
those two statements were general statements and not directed at him. If you look again, they were answers to his questions and not attacks on him. While we're at it, perhaps you can point out whom i have called names?
It is a war on Islam regardless of what others say or call it. Everyone knows and everyone believes it. If they want to call it something then call it what the whole Muslim world is calling it, war on ISLAM.
War on Islam? I find it very questionable how you can hold that view, given that the terrorists are killing Muslims, too. If you choose to identify with the radical organizations that use Islam to justify killing innocent people, then we are and should absolutely be at war with you. If you follow Islam as a religion of peace, then we have no problem.
It is a war on Islam regardless of what others say or call it. Everyone knows and everyone believes it. If they want to call it something then call it what the whole Muslim world is calling it, war on ISLAM.
If we are at war with Islam, why are you not in a POW Camp?
yes there has been aggression against Muslim practices and Muslims ever since the 9/11 attacks and you can't blame some nations for being afraid of us.Its not totally a war just aggression I believe.Maybe banning Islamic symbols like the hijab and restricting certain freedoms for Muslims(setting up Islamic organisations) or forcing Muslim countries to adopt secular and liberal laws may look like war against Muslims.the last one I have a real problem with.
'struggle against the international jihadist movement'
That would be tantamount to declaring war on Islam. That would be a bad way to go, however I don’t care one way or the other about the “War on terrorism” terminology.
It is a war on Islam regardless of what others say or call it.
Then the 6 million US Muslims and the 1 billion Muslims abroad who are not being chased down by the US military or the FBI must be confused as hell
Akil ~ Seeker of knowledge and understanding
When the rights of one person is restricted, the rights of all suffer- Woodrow
If we are at war with Islam, why are you not in a POW Camp?
The government is cunning and subtle. To declare war on 1.5 billion Muslims, would be strategically idiotic.
Militarily, economically and politically, if that were to ever happen, it could spell the collapse and destruction of the United States (financially, that is).
If you can't fund the wars, you'll lose. If you do fund endless/multiple wars (war without end/the "Long War"), it would invite economic collapse and maybe, mass dissent.
We can't even handle a 2 theater war with insurgents.
The government is cunning and subtle. To declare war on 1.5 billion Muslims, would be strategically idiotic.
Militarily, economically and politically, if that were to ever happen, it could spell the collapse and destruction of the United States (financially, that is).
If you can't fund the wars, you'll lose. If you do fund endless/multiple wars (war without end/the "Long War"), it would invite economic collapse and maybe, mass dissent.
We can't even handle a 2 theater war with insurgents.
Exactly. Look wat what happend to denmark cuz of their anti-islamic cartoons. It was a total boycott in Muslim world. They were loosing 10million a day with all the businesses they had there. They had to let go of thousands of their employees. And then the artists were hiding for their lives in their own countries. A full war against Muslims would mean end of any country that tries that tactic. It would be war from outside and inside. They are not that stupid to try it, so they use "terrorist" blanket to individually attack Muslim nations but that too will go on for so long, a war with iran is just inviteing WWIII.
The government is cunning and subtle. To declare war on 1.5 billion Muslims, would be strategically idiotic.
Militarily, economically and politically, if that were to ever happen, it could spell the collapse and destruction of the United States (financially, that is).
If you can't fund the wars, you'll lose. If you do fund endless/multiple wars (war without end/the "Long War"), it would invite economic collapse and maybe, mass dissent.
We can't even handle a 2 theater war with insurgents.
You know, I think this thread has gone about as far as it can go, because it is now becoming sidetracked. Inevitable I suppose, because there is only so much that can be said about the original news story.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks