Trump Redeclares War on Terror in Inaugural Address
A decades-long fight gets a new face.


Republicans got their wish today for a president that would utter the term "radical Islamic terrorism," when Donald Trump promised to "unite the civilized world against radical Islamic terrorism, which we will eradicate from the face of the Earth."
The use of the term became on issue on the campaign trail during the Republican primary season, one that stood in for the more complex question of how the war on terror ought to be conducted and what it meant. Trump's use of the phrase came along with an expansive definition of what the war on terror meant.
The Obama administration laid the groundwork for this. The post-9/11 authorization for the use of military force has been used for counter-terrorism operations in North Africa and the Middle East, the Indian Subcontinent, and West and East Africa. The U.S. has targeted groups like Boko Haram and Al-Shabab, as well as Al-Qaeda and ISIS affiliates in places like Libya and Afghanistan, whose fighters are often too young to remember the attacks of September 11, 2001, let alone to have anything to do with planning, authorizing, committing, or aiding the attack, or harboring organizations or people who did, as the AUMF stipulates.
Trump's promise to "reinforce old alliances and form new ones" suggests Trump is interested in expanding the global war on terror in places like Syria. Of the 26,000 bombs the U.S. was estimated to have dropped in 2016, about 12,000 are estimated to have been dropped on Syria, the most of any target country. Syria, along with Iraq and Afghanistan, are considered "areas of hostility" for U.S. government reporting purposes. The Obama administration insisted U.S. national security interests in Syria included the removal of Russia-ally Bashar Assad from power. Different parts of the U.S. government armed different sides of the conflict, some of which opposed each other. Disengaging from Syria and not permitting the Russian intervention to influence U.S. foreign policy-making is an altogether different prospect than aligning with Russia to prosecute the war on terror together.
"We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world, but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first," Trump said in his inaugural address—U.S. policy makers should ask whether America's best interests lie in more military operations around the world.
"We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone," Trump continued, "but rather to let it shine as an example. We will shine for everyone to follow." That departed from Bush-era rhetoric. In his second inaugural address, President George W. Bush insisted that the "survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands," and so it would be U.S. policy "to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world."
Tyranny was Bush's go-to word for the war on terror—he didn't mention radical Islamic terrorism in his 2005 inaugural address. "There is only one force of history that can break the reign of hatred and resentment, and expose the pretensions of tyrants, and reward the hopes of the decent and tolerant," Bush said in that address, "and that is the force of human freedom." Freedom, of course, was another go-to word in talking about the war on terror.
Obama struck a similar tone, in 2009, describing the war on terror as a "war against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred" insisting Americans would "not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense," and promising terrorists the U.S. would defeat them. During the 2012 election, the Obama campaign pushed a narrative that the administration had essentially won the war on terror—the president took credit for ending the Iraq war despite trying to postpone the withdrawal and claimed the war in Afghanistan is coming to a close (it remains ongoing). He called ISIS (which the U.S. is fighting in Iraq today ) a JV squad while continuing to expand the war on terror behind the scenes.
"A decade of war is now ending," Obama declared in his 2013 inaugural address—he was wrong; he left office as the first U.S. president to preside entirely during a time of war. "We, the people, still believe that enduring security and lasting peace do not require perpetual war," he observed. Yet both major candidates last year promised more of it, and Trump made his promise for the first time as president today. Sixteen years of bipartisan work on a culture of fear and paranoia about national security, and physical security and cyber security and any other kind of security fear mongers can exploit, is set to come into fruition under the Trump administration.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
It's been and hour and a half. Have the Enabling Acts been signed in yet?
First they have to call up Marinus van der Lubbe and give him a special assignment...
-1 Capitol Building
You know who else talked about eradicating a particular group from the face of the Earth?
The Turks?
That's nobody's business.
The aliens in "Independence Day"?
The Nazi-hunters in Castle Wolfenstein?
SJWs?
Luddites?
Luddite hunters?
Vampires?
Vampire hunters?
The vampires who are trying to wipe out the vampire hunters?
The Vampire Hunters' Defense League, tasked with protecting the vampire hunters from the assassin vampires?
The Martians?
The Fourth Reich?
Feminists?
The Tokugawa Shogunate during the Shimabara Rebellion?
MADD?
The Andals?
Can we please stop with the incessant bitching about the number of Trump article today? The man just became president and each writer at Reason is giving his interpretation of this event. It's not like there are 10 article by the same author. I know yokels love to outrage even more than progs, but seriously guys. Scream into a pillow or something.
I agree, the number of articles makes more sense today. It's probably leftover fatigue from most of 2016, where one would swear that just one major-party candidate was running.
Or, framed another way, the more relevant, impactful candidate got more coverage in 2016?
Or, framed another another way, one candidate didn't win until November.
Sumboode want to get the chopstick shoved up their assho
For awhile there "Reason Magazine Trump" actually knocked "Reason Magazine holocaust denial" off of the Google autofill. But after the election there's both there.
I'm only seeing "Reason Magazine Trump" but "Reason Magazine Podcast" is top 5 so you take the good with the bad.
+1 Facts of Life
I get holocaust denial as number 4, under podcast and Trump.
I didn't get holocaust denial.
wiki, editor, Trump, subscription, podcast.
I'm perfectly calm, dude.
Calmer'n you are.
I got buddies who died face down in the muck so that you and I could enjoy this family website!
Too bad they keeled over their mucky keyboards before implementing an edit button.
Everything's a travesty with you, man.
They peed on your fuckin' rug.
These euphemisms...
What a bunch of fucking amateurs. You write an article about Donald Trump, we're supposed to shit ourselves with fear? Fucking amateurs.
I'm freaking out, bro!
Tis true, but I can't help but hope for some contrarian to instead write some article about food trucks or firing ranges or raw milk or something.
Save us 2Chilly, you're our only hope.
I agree. Furthermore I'm willing to bet that the same people bitching about all the Trump articles wouldn't be bitching if the articles were just Breitbart-level pro-Trump propaganda.
Now see, that there? That's just your own shitty bias there. Unless you're talking about John, then carry on.
Yup, mainly talking about John.
Possibly, but it would probably more productive to try to influence Trump in a libertarian direction. His policy positions seem to be...malleable..to say the least. Even if it's just a screed in Trump-ese
Hey, government, fuck'em right? You think these losers should be telling business men what to do? You ever see these losers? Walking around their office wearing pleated Dockers with sneakers? They're gonna be in charge?
America seems greater already.
Could be cause almost weekend though.
Oh yay.
It's not called The Forever War for nothing.
""We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world, but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first,""
Oh really? I can just imagine what will happen when some American gets in trouble in a foreign country and that country wants to impose a harsh sentence on him/her. What will Trump do? "Oh well, that country has the right to impose harsh justice"? Of course not.
+ Singapore canings
Tbf, Fuck Terrorists. t('_'t)
Trump will protect us from the Muzzies - right??
It's annoying to see these protestors being called anarchists. Aren't they really just vandals? (Who also happen to an all-powerful, violent government).
How dare you insult the noble Vandal peoples!
+1 University of Idaho
*jeers*
/Visigoth
Splitter!
/Ostrogoth
Posers. *Takes drag off cigarette and listens to The Cure.*
Yeah, communist are anarchist and national socialist are right wing and progressives are liberals. It's always Bizzaro world on the left.
Some of them been watchin ISIS vids, I tell ya!
Just plain little-bugs.
Litter
Yes, people violently protesting against smaller government can in no sense of the word be accurately called anarchist.
Someone directed me to this article in Harper's (or their blog) which apparently TOTALLY PWNS DONALD TRUMP.
I see he has won the war on paragraphs.
Just ran out to grab a bite to eat. So far, no Mad Max bandits marauding on the roads, no nuclear explosions, and no Mexicans being herded into rail cars, so far as I can tell. Stock market appears to have not crashed, and I witnessed no rapes between here and Jimmy Johns.
I'm beginning to think some people exaggerated the impact of a Trump Presidency.
Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it's not happening.
It's only been three hours.
Do you have any idea how long it takes to fuel 6,000 nukes? Also Trump is a showman so he'll probably wait until the Doomsday clock is at 1 minute to midnight for dramatic effect.
I to expect Operation Kristallnacht 2: Electric Boogaloo to begin around that time.
*too
He looks bored already. Just thinking "when do I get to bang my wife as president?"
Wouldn't you too?!
"How does it feel to fuck the President, baby? Huh, baby? YEAAH!"
Jimmy Johns
These euphemisms are getting more and more direct and poignant ^^;
"Just ran out to grab a bite to eat. So far, no Mad Max bandits marauding on the roads"
So, I take it you don't live in Detroit??
Maybe it's standard procedure; I cannot recall; I flipped on the teevee earlier, and they had split screen coverage of Trump signing some papers, and the Obamas working their way through an adoring throng of mourners toward the door of "Executive One" en route to California, for a fundraiser well earned vacation (or so it was alleged).
So I'll just put this here:
Dear Obama- STFU and GTFO.
I don't want to see your smarmy butter-won't-melt-in-my-mouth face again, ever. I never again want to be subjected to the grievous annoyance which is the sound of your voice, spewing your moronic platitudinous "thoughts" on any topic.
SCAT!
yr hmbl svnt
you're homble savant?
All I can really get from this is that you're into shit play.
OK Barack, you had your fun. Now you have to spend the next 8 years in silence in Crawford, Texas. That's just how we do things now.
I witnessed no rapes between here and Jimmy Johns.
Thanks a lot, Debbie Downer.
*hangs car keys back on hook, gets peanut butter and crackers*
I think you have to go to Subway and order a $5 foot long for that.
-1 Jared
He's gonna flip on that vaguely non-interventionist rhetoric faster then Obama, isn't he??
Still hoping to be proven wrong, but based on the past two presidents, pessimistic.