Issue:U.S. Officials Retool Slogan for Terror War - New York Times:

Specific:"In recent speeches and news conferences, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and the nation's senior military officer have spoken of 'a global struggle against violent extremism' rather than 'the global war on terror,' which had been the catchphrase of choice. Administration officials say that phrase may have outlived its usefulness, because it focused attention solely, and incorrectly, on the military campaign. "

Comment:There is no event or activity that is new in this story. Only the name has changed. Young Men are dying in our Military, Civilians are dying and it is no longer a "War". It is a "struggle". How should I treat the next Solider I meet? Should I applaud him for serving in a struggle? In my opinion - Yes - but that is because I understand the history of war a bit.

The next generation will view a "struggle" as something different. Like Veterans of the Korean War, who are generally less honored than those of WWII.

This is propaganda at it's purest form. It is perhaps rhetorical, but it is not used in the context of a debate. It is the thing being debated, but not a point used to advance a point in the debate.