“You can disagree with the rationale behind the Iraq War without being a nut.”
Yeah, but you can’t run and hide from the war on terror with being a card carrying idiot...
I'll agree that, in what I have heard, RP over-simplifies the terrorist acts involved in 9-11; his prhase "11 thugs" rang false with me. It was 11 members of some quasi-national mafia. His statement showed either a willful or an ignorant misunderstanding of the organization behind the act.
That said, the term "War on terror" rings about as false as the term "hate crime" with me. You can't have a war on an emotion. I would rather use the term "war on enemies of the United States."
That would keep front and center the imperatives that we identify who they are, what they did or are doing, who is funding them, how they threaten the USA, and what their motives are. It would also help define measurable finish lines in our overseas conflicts.
You need to identify an enemy's motives to find their weaknesses - especially important when you are dealing with suicide bombers who don't even seem to value their own lives. But the bombers are usually stooges for puppet masters who'd wimper if they cut themselves shaving. Unless you want to keep cutting off a new hydra head every few years, I think answering these questions and changing the cultural "cradle" of the recruits is important. I agree with GWB that a true message of freedom and the priority of self over government is important. By its nature the nature of man as defined in the Declaration of Independence transcends government and is the antidote to the Middle East pot-stirrers, among others.