How about? The Global War and Struggle Against Terror and Violent Islamic Extremism."

It works for me. The radical Islamics are behind it, and that is who must be destroyed. Terminate without prejudice!

Christian Science Monitor Blog | Verbal Energy Archive August, 2005

Defining militancy downward: GWOT's next?
By Ruth Walker

Reports of the demise of the global war on terror (GWOT to those in the know, both hawks and doves) are greatly exaggerated.

So insists US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. In an address in Texas this week, he denied that the Bush administration is backing away from GWOT in favor of "the global struggle against violent extremism" as the preferred term for well, you know, all this stuff that keeps happening.

The Dallas Morning News quoted him thus:

Some ask, are we still engaged in a war on terror? Let there be no mistake about it. It’s a war.

President Bush banged the same drum in a speech Wednesday: "Make no mistake about it, we are at war." Those interested in hard data have taken to counting how often he uses certain phrases. The tally for Wednesday's round: War on terror, 5; Global struggle against violent extremism, 0. ..."


So what we really have here is a "Global War and Struggle Against Terror and Violent Islamic Extremism."

Everybody happy now?

:)