War On Terror?

The “War on Terror”. If you really analyze that buzz phrase you'll soon realize that it is not correct. In fact, it doesn't serve the purpose of defense and security, because it is invalid. Let me explain. Just so you know, I only had this revelation less than two minutes ago while reading news, and then looking up a definition on “terrorize”. Therefore, like most of my writing, I have not thought this through very much and might be incomplete.

Here is the short chronology that inspired the writing of this blog:

http://cbs8.com
14 Sep 2007, approx. 2:35PM Pacific Time
WORLD NEWS
“Powerful Aftershocks Terrorize Indonesia”

After reading that headline (link), I questioned whether “Terrorize” was spelled correctly because I thought it should be spelled “Terrorise”. So, I did a google search on the definition, which led me to this website:

http://www.answers.com/topic/terrorize

WordNet

The verb terrorize has 2 meanings:

Meaning 1: coerce by violence or with threats
  Synonym: terrorise

Meaning 2: fill with terror; frighten greatly
  Synonyms: terrify, terrorise

After noticing the spelling was correct, I continued to read the definitions and to just let my mind begin to ponder and analyze the meaning and understanding of that word. Then, if I can still remember now as I write here, came up with an idea.

I began to think about the reality of violence and fear and threats. Here is what came to my mind. The act of violence towards people, and the destruction of property with the intent to harm people physically, emotionally, or psychologically is not terror. It is an act of violence and destruction. The consequence of that destruction and violence may result in fear from its survivors and witnesses, but that is a result of the act itself. If witnesses and survivors of those types of behaviors choose not to experience fright or become threatened, then there is no terror. Even if those violent people intend to threaten or frighten people by their acts, it does not necessarily mean that they have terrorized them. It is up to the witnesses and survivors of the violence to be frightened or not. Using the word “terror” is giving extra power to those people that choose to do those acts of destruction. It is their intent to frighten and threaten people. But, if nobody gets frightened then it is not an act of terror. It is only an act of violence and destruction. When we say that it is an “act of terror” then we are admitting to the people that have done such acts that they have succeeded in frightening us.

A much more accurate phrase could be “an intentional act of destruction”, or “a war on destruction”. Bombs cause destruction of life and property. Terror is the possible result of that destruction. The phrase, “war on terror” means to me that there is a struggle to control the fearful minds of witnesses and survivors of acts of destruction. People can either be afraid and threatened by those acts committed, or they can view the destruction as a random and chaotic event, like we see in the destruction that earthquakes and hurricanes cause people. Just because destruction comes from people or from nature doesn't mean we have to feel afraid or threatened. People, as well as nature, cause destruction and pain to people.

Just maybe, if we go back in time far enough, we'll realize that people learned to kill people by witnessing the weather and such natural acts of destruction. Or, maybe not. Maybe we learned to bring harm to people because we got confused in our struggles to defend ourselves against other lower forms of life. We once lived in the jungle where the animals could kill and eat us. So, in order to defend ourselves, we would kill them. Maybe, just maybe, the hunters of those days long ago got confused over who was an animal and who was a person. It's my intention to bring us back long ago to discover what happened so that we can get on the right track again and work together as a unified team of people to defend ourselves from the real threats to humanity; microbes, animals, and weather.

So, that's all I feel like writing today on that subject. Maybe it'll come up again. Or maybe not. So, it's not a “war on terror”. It should be a “defense against confusion”.