{"id":67984,"date":"2006-09-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-09-11T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/09\/11\/gwot-ou-long-war-si-vous-voulez-definie-par-notre-fameux-grand-guignol\/"},"modified":"2006-09-11T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2006-09-11T00:00:00","slug":"gwot-ou-long-war-si-vous-voulez-definie-par-notre-fameux-grand-guignol","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/09\/11\/gwot-ou-long-war-si-vous-voulez-definie-par-notre-fameux-grand-guignol\/","title":{"rendered":"GWOT (ou \u201cLong War<\/em>\u201d, si vous voulez) d\u00e9finie par notre fameux Grand-Guignol"},"content":{"rendered":"

Michael Vlahos est l’un des dirigeants du National Security Analysis Department du laboratoire de physique appliqu\u00e9e de Johns Hopkins. Il a pris la plume et s’est mis en t\u00eate de nous expliquer ce qu’est GWOT, la grande guerre contre la terreur, ou la Long War<\/em>. On est de plus en plus convaincu que ces variations s\u00e9mantiques, ces noms de guerre en forme de slogans, ces acronymes barbares, constituent l’illustration du caract\u00e8re rocambolesque, ou abracadabrantesque comme dirait l’autre, de cet \u00e9trange conflit qui existe, mais qui n’existe pas<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tVlahos ne s’en laisse pas conter. Il analyse avec minutie l’\u00e9volution du concept avec ses effets dans la r\u00e9alit\u00e9 tiens, la r\u00e9alit\u00e9? Il est question de r\u00e9alit\u00e9? En effet, et comme toujours nous permettrions-nous de dire, Vlahos d\u00e9busque rapidement la principale caract\u00e9ristique et le principal travers du concept. Quel rapport cette guerre gigantesque et ph\u00e9nom\u00e9nale a-t-elle avec la r\u00e9alit\u00e9?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tEh bien, \u00e0 la fin, Vlahos n’y tient plus. Il termine sa longue analyse en exp\u00e9diant la bord\u00e9e d\u00e9finitive. Pour lui, GWOT alias the long War<\/em>, c’est Grand’Guignol, vous savez, le spectacle que l’on trouve para\u00eet-il dans un cabaret de Montmartre. (Cela nous fait chaud au cur que cet auteur am\u00e9ricain, publiant sur un site de Honh Kong, Atimes.com<\/a>, le 9 septembre, ne trouve pas n\u00e9cessaire de donner un mot d’explication sur Montmartre : Montmartre, tout le monde conna\u00eet, au contraire de GWOT qui a besoin de tant d’explications.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tGrand’Guignol? Pas si b\u00eate. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abThe Long War is a failed narrative because it does not describe actual reality. Reality tells a story of a United States delivering change to the Muslim world, a force of creative destruction. If anything, this US-created reality only fires up the long-standing Muslim grand narrative of deliverance and restoration. Moreover, the Long War perversely elevates the takfiri narrative by telling Muslims that the US is the dark force that must be resisted.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThe Long War is thus more than a failed narrative. It is a self-defeating narrative. It has prospered only because it speaks to a highly motivated domestic audience, the conservative Republican base that remains the passionate heart of the Bush administration’s war policy.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThere was an old theater in Montmartre that specialized in sensational and horrifying dramatic entertainments. It was called the Grand Guignol (\u00a0\u00bbBig Puppet\u00a0\u00bb). It is a fitting name for the strategy-trumping, domestic political theater of America’s imperial court.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tMis en ligne le 11 septembre 2006 \u00e0 17H43<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Michael Vlahos est l’un des dirigeants du National Security Analysis Department du laboratoire de physique appliqu\u00e9e de Johns Hopkins. Il a pris la plume et s’est mis en t\u00eate de nous expliquer ce qu’est GWOT, la grande guerre contre la terreur, ou la Long War. On est de plus en plus convaincu que ces variations… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[5881,2957,5882,4661,5071,4128],"class_list":["post-67984","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-bvlahos","tag-grand","tag-guignol","tag-gwot","tag-long","tag-war"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67984","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=67984"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67984\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=67984"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=67984"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=67984"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}