War on Terror "So-Called????"

OpinionJournal - Best of the Web Today Cites the New York Times: "the wealthy nations have not done enough about the root causes of terrorism and why Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden continue to function after almost four years of the so-called war on terrorism. Many will wonder why the United States is mired in Iraq while Al Qaeda's leader still roams free."

And this Derrick Z. Jackson of the Boston Globe: "The innocents in the so-called war on terror are always ''our" citizens or the citizens of our allies. The only inocent Iraqis are those killed by ''insurgents." Our soldiers clearly did not intend to kill innocents. But this posturing of America as the great innocent, when everyone knows we kill innocents ourselves, is likely only to make us look more like the devil in the eyes of a suicide bomber."

I'm sorry, but if you don't know that this is actually a war and if you cannot tell the difference between people trying to stop mass murder and those committing these atrocities then I cannot see how we will, or even deserve to win, this "so-called war."

Were those "so-called" explosions that ripped apart buses and trains in London deliberately TARGETING civilians? Were those explosives placed there by "so-called" terrorists or freedom fighters, the equivalent of American Revolutionary War heroes?

This Orwellian denial is so pervasive on the left that should they take power in government anytime soon we could expect nothing short of a long slow surrender to increasing terror and death.

The consequence of this deluded moral equivalency places the blood of the innocents squarely on the hands of those who would do nothing effective to defend against further atrocity.