Talk:Criticism of the war on terror

message: That pretty much sums it up. VolatileChemical 18:22, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oh my god, why is this article mostly just copied from the main [[War on Terrorism]] article? 

message: I expected a rational, (relatively) unbiased discussion of the various criticisms leveled against the 'War on Terror'.  Instead what I got were criticisms of the war on terror.  Let me make this important point: this article is supposed to be ABOUT the criticisms of the War on Terror, it is not supposed to BE a criticism of the War on Terror.  I'm sorry, but even given that I happen to agree with many of the main points espoused, this piece reads more like an Op-Ed then an encyclopedia article.  And that's not what I come to Wikipedia for.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.241.26.83 (talk) 07:15, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A long list of "criticisms" will always look to you like a prolonged criticism; I don't quite understand what you're getting at. What are you looking for? Counter arguments to the criticism? Haha. 165.123.207.134 (talk) 19:33, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Even when it is fully developed, it will still be biased. Many articles beginning with "Criticism of" are not neutral, and they don't look like they are trying to become neutral, such as "Criticism of religion" 98.248.151.150 (talk) 17:49, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is nothing like what I'd hoped to find 

message: ...makes it sound like a twisted, concrete (as opposed to abstract) version of the Muslim jihad (which is striving against the desire to do evil as a method of benefitting oneself). 207.210.29.71 (talk) 03:59, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hm. The way this "war on terrorism" is described... 

message: We should add a section like this for a place for negative thoughts about this criticism. This should restore the neutrality of this article, and allow a place for other opinions to move into. "Criticism of Criticism of the War on Terror" may sound weird, but this article seriously needs more than one prespective. 66.183.59.211 (talk) 01:58, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism of Criticism of the War on Terror 

message: This section is hilariously lacking in neutrality and awareness of grammar:
There have been important criticisms that there have been double-standards in Bush Administration's War on Terror. These double-standards have involved the unwillingness of the United States to send military troops into Pakistan to search for Osama Bin Ladin  because the Bush administration has been unwilling to violate the sovereignty of Pakistan, who has exported nuclear technology to North Korea. Whereas the Bush Administration has had no inhibitions about violating the sovereignty of Iraq on claims that Saddam Hussein used weapons of mass destruction on Kurdish citizens in Iraq, and had ties to al-Qaeda. These actions raise concern to critics about the objective of the invasion, mainly having it look like the real objective of the invasion in Iraq was to secure the oil reserves.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.208.87.8 (talk) 12:15, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I totally agree.  Like most 'Criticisms of' articles, it is a grab bag of unrelated or semi-related complaints, criticisms, gripes, etc, thrown together without regard to wp:OR or wp:note.  I highly recommend a rewrite. Bonewah (talk) 04:07, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The article changed significantly since Dec. 2007, I've removed the NPOV template, please use  or better yet  for statements and detail issues here. This will help address them quickly. - RoyBoy 03:50, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: Per WP:CRIT#Separate articles devoted to criticism, trivia or reception (history), I am proposing the criticism of the War on Terror, located on that page be merged here, and summarized as stated in the linked essay. Specifically due to:
Since there is already an article that separately deals with criticism of the other article's subject, the criticism should be included here, and a summary in accordance with WP:SS of all view points of the multiple criticisms, should be left in place in the current section. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:40, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The content found in the War on Terror article goes beyond the size of summary, and therefore, beyond a paragraph or two highlighting key points, the rest of the content should be merged/moved here. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:54, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge section from main article 

message: This is my first talk post on wikipedia, so forgive me if I do anything wrong, but I remember reading that the term 'War on Terror' was actually coined at a 1980's conference after the Iran hostage crisis. I'm not entirely sure about the source , since it was a borrowed book, but it was probably in Melani McAlister's 'Epic Encounters'. I feel this is something that should definitely be covered in the article, and would help fix it's obvious bias.
Rgtvandenberg (talk) 16:06, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  'War on terror' first used in 1980's? 

message: this article lacks of a section about terrorist organizations which US or UN does not fight with. 
for example PKK has bases in Iraq but US does not need to fight against PKK although it is a terrorist organization.
this example shows that this war is not against terrorism. 
for ten years no PKK militant have been neutralized by allied. 
Turkey has to fight alone against PKK or has to unite with Iran. 
A Nato member is attacked by a terrorist organization and does not have any help from US, which is operating "war on terrorism".
this article has to have a section about this situation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.187.49.214 (talk) 21:43, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  US-safe terrorist organizations 

message: i don't think the term "Pejorative terms" fits wiki's NPOV policy 85.195.69.112 (talk) 17:21, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  the "Pejorative terms" section 

message: I got rid of it.  The reason is that the entire section was, essentially, a stretch filled with POV and original research, though the research was admittedly rather good (though the thematic characterization of that research was not scholarship at its best).  I would suggest this portion be included in an article on illegal immigration and policy in the United States.--Yachtsman1 (talk) 18:36, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  War on Immigration 

message: This article is clearly a POV fork intended to isolate aspects of this topic, not just criticism, from the larger subject.  For example, the "Role of US media" section was once part of the larger parent article in 2011 and is not necessarily critical of the War on Terror as much as it is a form of media criticism.  Viriditas (talk) 11:30, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV fork 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Criticism of the War on Terror. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090114085106/http://seattletimes.nwsource.com:80/html/nationworld/2002023596_russanal02.html to http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002023596_russanal02.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100612123848/http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta06/ERES1507.htm to http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta06/ERES1507.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100621090252/http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/us_law/PDF/detainees/Getting_to_Ground_Truth_090804.pdf to http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/us_law/PDF/detainees/Getting_to_Ground_Truth_090804.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:22, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Criticism of the War on Terror. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5412316/site/newsweek/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081228094109/http://pewglobal.org/commentary/display.php?AnalysisID=1019 to http://pewglobal.org/commentary/display.php?AnalysisID=1019
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:26, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified