[SVMc]

There's a massive amount of IR literature out there on this exact subject.

On a quick overview one of the theories the I think is the most rounded out is the employment of the soundbite to gain legitimacy.

Basically increasingly as our society operates in information overload the soundbite is the modus-operendi of PR communciations.

War - is a great PR word.

It lends a state authority, automatic legitimacy. Not only does it legitimize large amount of money spent, but it also puts discussisons into a very "black and white" context.

People who counter the War on 'X" are viewed (at best) as apathetic, or inferior citizens and (at worst) as traitors.

Because of the military connotation War adds a sense of emergency to an issue, it becomes securitized (Carole Cohn writes some wonderful books on the language of security).

When we securitize an issue the general population has less ability to question the issue.... it becomes the realm of security experts.

So using "war"

1. adds legitimacy to a particular course of action
2. securitizes the issue into a "you're with us or against us" theme
3. inhibits public discussion that is more apparent on non-securitized policy issues.