G-SAVE, 看上去好像是充滿宗教意味的 God save us 的意思, 但原來是 " Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism "! 又是布殊政府下, 美軍的魔鬼詞典!
語言與政治密不可分, G-SAVE是美軍部署離開伊拉克前的軍事策略, 之前一直在用GWOT(global war on terriorism). 新一階段則以 struggle 來取代 war 並以宗教性的縮寫來修飾. 不過, 有一些美國政治評論員說, 所謂的GWOT (global war on terrorism)和 G-SAVE 均為美國發動第四次世界大戰的修詞.
znet有一篇很詳細的分析文章, 現節錄一小部份於此:
Last week, the State Department issued an "updated worldwide caution" about "extremist violence" against U.S. citizens traveling abroad. According to Robin Wright of the Washington Post, the warning
"said attacks against private and official targets could come in the form of assassinations, kidnappings, hijackings or bombings. The targets could include places where Americans meet or visit, such as residential areas, hotels and restaurants, as well as places of worship, schools, clubs, business offices and public areas, the caution said...As causes of concern, the department cited spillover from the U.S. intervention in Iraq in and outside the Middle East..."
This was not long after other officials in the Bush administration, who had been arguing fiercely since September 11, 2001 for a series of deep links between terrorism and Iraq, strove hard to deny that the terrorist bombings in London's subways had anything to do with Iraq. So the message was clear: Don't leave home because... uh, they hate us (but Iraq has nothing to do with it). Somebody just hadn't bothered to inform the State Department.
In the meantime, the President and his people -- who have spent the last four years reaching for their dictionaries (the way gunfighters once reached for their six-guns) whenever they wanted to redefine our world to fit their needs -- suddenly, and quite atypically, broke ranks over a definition. A week ago, led by Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, the President's top men and women began using a new phrase. The Global War on Terror (fondly, if inelegantly, known as GWOT) was to be no more. It was now the "global struggle against violent extremism" (or G-SAVE) and Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, explained why. He told the National Press Club that he had "objected to the use of the term 'war on terrorism' before, because if you call it a war, then you think of people in uniform as being the solution."
Somehow, the new term, and acronym, hit the planet like one of those "tripods" from Mars after the germs got to it. The media ridiculed it, and George Bush, our "war president," agreed. He immediately broke ranks with his own spinmeisters. In a speech last week, he managed to use the phrase "war on terror" repeatedly and "global struggle against violent extremism" a total of zero times. According to former State Department counterterrorism official Larry Johnson, at a White House meeting a peeved "Bush reportedly said he was not in favor of the new term . . . In fact, he said, 'no one checked with me.' That comment brought an uncomfortable silence to the assembled group of pooh-bahs. The president insisted it was still a war as far as he is concerned."
But perhaps there's a compromise here. We wouldn't want to lose this administration's four-year late recognition that military power is not the be-all and end-all in the struggle against terrorism. So how about combining the two acronyms, saving the "struggle" against "violent extremism," while not losing the "war" element that so sets the President's blood a-boiling. What about G-SAVEGWOT?...