Shortly after 9/11, a strange, frenzied linguistic debate seemed to leap, almost fully formed, into the public discourse. At issue was whether the terrorist attacks should be considered "criminal acts" or "acts of war." Arrayed on one side were diplomatically cautious liberals and Europeans, who thought the "crime" nomenclature would keep moderate Muslim nations on board and better prepare the public for the conflict ahead; they were joined by legal scholars who warned the domestic and international criminal justice system was better suited to this kind of twilight struggle. On the other side stood a group of conservative analysts who deemed the "war" locution a crucial strategic and historic choice.