Wednesday, June 29, 2016


While it is true that Turkey is the largest of our Muslim allies in the fight against terrorism, until they heed Donald Trump's warning that they must call it "radical Muslim terrorism" they risk being effective in their efforts.  By simply calling it "terrorism", they cannot hope to beat ISIS.


  1. The problem isn't in the name.The problem is in the ambitions of the President who in moving away from the secular state of Ataturk is fearful of anything that might seem anti religious.Do you think that in this world of symbolic interaction that he may be forced to stop attacking Kurds and go after Isis which almost certainly is responsible for the attack on ttaturk Airport?I sense that he still will not fully commit,but will continue to attack the Kurds.What we are willing to do to force commitment is important.

  2. Monikers flung in resistance do little harm. Calling Donald Trump a pathologically narcissistic liar hasn't made much difference in his campaign bid. Whereas, his own words and actions have harmed him much more so.

    Mr. Thomas is probably correct in his assessments. All of the parties involved in the Middle East region have claimed agendas, as well as hidden (sometimes not well) ones. How those play out is oft-times confusing and complicated. I believe that old saying "You can't tell one player from another without a scorecard." applies in that region. Fighting terrorism is impossible ... how do you fight terminology?

    1. More to the clarification of terrorism as a mere technique, which has no national boundaries: Since Ankara's airport terrorists were from Russia, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, does that mean that, for the Chief Narcissist, those countries are also to be added to indiscriminate bombings, or their innocent citizens denied entry/movement? I have visions of the last scene in the iconic "Dr. Strangelove!"

  3. Ah, the Kurds! Greg, "Fighting terrorism is impossible ... how do you fight terminology?" Precisely. More accurately, a technique. Certainly not by describing your intended actions! So the Chief Narcissist has the luxury to bait his opponents (which include the administration) by stating that "they're doing nothing!" Talk about treasonous goading. A disgrace.

  4. I enjoy pointing out absurdity. Many of my posts consist of little absurdities like calling an armed struggle a "magical name". Even little children know better: "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never harm me" Yet, all of the Republican candidates seriously made a big thing out of Obama not using "Islamic terrorism attributing the slow progress, in fighting ISIS, to this fact.

  5. Susanna, my use of the word "terminology" was due to the claim by Trump (and others in the GOP) that changing which moniker is used, terrorism versus radical Muslim terrorism, will somehow fortify our efforts. What it actually does is serve to demonize an entire religion as being radical terrorists.

    Actually, you can't fight a technique either, only those using the technique. When push comes to shove, aren't we also viewed by those suffering as collateral damage from our drone attacks, as ourselves being terrorists? Perspective is everything.

    Addressing the issue of perspective, we saw the Taliban and al Qaeda (including bin Laden) as freedom fighters when they were fighting against the Russians, then later as rebel terrorists when fighting against us. They remained the same, only our perspective changed.

  6. Greg, in keeping with the wry concept of this blog, I was poking fun on the obvious. Naturally, I agree. Perspective? Oh, yes. Does the name Contras conjure "Freedom Fighters?" Just a rhetorical question. ;-) (though not intended to be funny as pain and suffering are equal opportunity consequences.)

  7. " ... pain and suffering are equal opportunity consequences." ~ Susanna

    I agree totally. In fact, that's one place where the Law of Supply & Demand has broken down: "The Law of Supply & Demand has a fault; there's still so much pain and suffering being produced, while there’s so little demand for it."

    I actually stated this premise back in 2014 on this very blog, Herb, in your "Justification of Injustice" post dated Monday, Dec. 22, 2014, though I have used it else much earlier.