An early New Years resolution: I will never again say or write the words

[karlrschneider]

"Iraq war" - henceforth I will refer to the situation as the "Iraq Occupation."

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[molly]

2. Invasion - takeover - rape of a country

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[karlrschneider]

7. For an unavoidable while, and yes.

.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[karlrschneider]

13. I fully support the troops, they are doing what they are forced to do and

are indoctrinated to believe they are doing the "right thing." When they deviate from that position, they cease to be useful. That said,
the trials at Nuremburg come to mind more and more frequently.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[karlrschneider]

16. You are not reading carefully. I did not say I -want- Nuremburg-style

proceedings...simply bringing it up as a future POSSIBILITY. My support for the troops is contingent on them absolutely NOT massacring people, but we all know there certainly -have- been such incidents. So let's say I support 98% (or whatever the fraction is) who haven't committed atrocities.

[m berst]

19. we don't live in a military dictatorship...

...so the political opinions of citizens who happen to be in the military are not relevant to the political opinions of those who are not.

The idea that civilians should have the same "belief" as "the troops" is only appropriate to a totalitarian theory of government and is distinctly anti-American.

Politicization of the military, as well as the militarization of politics are dangerous trends, and were warned about by the founding fathers.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[m berst]

41. not sure what you are talking about

I can't make much sense of your posts on this thread. There are ongoing, detailed and comprehensive discussions going on here among Democrats on these various subjects that you are now raising. Your posts seem to be oblivious to that. Nothing wrong with presenting a radical new view of the campaign, the war, the party, Kerry et al, but if you are going to do that you are going to have to go into a little more detail. It is not at all clear to me from your remarks that you are a Democrat or a liberal, unless you are a newly converted one. Again, if you are new to being a Democrat, or simply have some radical new proposals, then it might be be a good idea if you explain how this all fits into the discussions that liberals and Democrats are already having on these subjects.

[troubleinwinter]

22. "they voted overwhelmingly for Bush"

Would you like to back up this assertion?

[juslikagrzly]

28. I so resent your implication that "we" don't care about our troops

if we oppose the war.

What was it Kerry said? Something about being the last man to die for a mistake??

[merh]

32. I am not familiar with the stats you suggest exist regarding

what the troops in Iraq believe. Can you provide me a link that reflects that the troops IN IRAQ overwhelmingly supported the weed?

[peacetalksforall]

40. There is an important distinction between military brass who

have fooled themselves into thinking that they are defending the United States and the soldiers who did not expect to kill in this way. It is one thing to defend your nation against armies and another to fight for corporate imperialism. In that light I can support those who don't have killing in their heart against those who brainwash and allow brainwashing for the purpose of taking out innocent people and the resultant damage.

Someone declared war on Afghanistan and the gun was pointed there - then someone got young soldiers to turn slightly and shoot Iraq.

[karlrschneider]

5. Is there a strange odor in this thread?

:evilgrin:

[Jack Bone]

8. Unwarranted Act Of Aggression

[karlrschneider]

3. See post 2

...

[leftchick]

6. Why an...

illegal bombing campaign and invasion. What do you call it?

[peacetalksforall]

39. I would call it imperialistic killing.

[franken-sense]

9. Isn't WAR a dirty enough word? n/t

[karlrschneider]

11. The word itself has no intrinsic "dirty" or "clean" connotation but the

phrase "Iraq war" is both an oxymoron and an outright lie.
Are you sure you are in the right forum?

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[karlrschneider]

17. It isn't about parsing, it's about linguistic accuracy. The invasion

never met the constitutionally legal definition of "war." (Neither, of course did Korea or Viet Nam, but those are other discussions and in any case do not legitimize the current debacle.)

[teach1st]

18. Just the opposite...

...much of the electorate seems to have absorbed the catch phrases and not the concepts, and it wasn't for lack of explaining the concepts. Half the electorate didn't want to hear the explanations, which were compelling and factual: There was no reason to invade Iraq. The reasons given by our administration were lies. There was no WMD. There was no 9/11 connection. Our soldiers are dieing. Innocent civilians are dieing in large numbers. There is no reason for our soldiers and for innocent civilians to be dieing.

We explained the concepts. If we could get voters to go with concepts, we might be fine, but they're not and so we're not fine. It's the catch phrases stupid!

Instead of catch phrases like "Mission Accomplished" and "Liberating Iraq" we make sure we have our own:

Iraqi occupation
Iraqi invasion
Death and torture

Or whatever. Just as the original poster said. Maybe then the concepts will sink in.

[karlrschneider]

23. Exactly, the neocon sound bytes "mission accomplished" and

"liberating Iraq" appeal to an appallingly huge number of people who prefer to be spoon-fed "feel good" (mis)information rather than thinking for themselves. The phrases appeal to the visceral perceptions in two areas: the vicarious "thrill of victory" on the one hand, and altruism on the other.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[karlrschneider]

30. But for every media mention of those, Chimp's got 5000...

...

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[m berst]

20. Joe Sixpack?

So explain the entire concepts to us.

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Harlan James]

12. I prefer "Bush Family Vanity War"

Though something along the lines of it being a business initiative put into motion by Bush family patrons and their employees works for me as well.

[juslikagrzly]

21. Add "insurgents" and "insurgency"

I asked my repug relatives this question. If Iraqi soldiers invaded our country to "liberate" us from our evil president, and we rose up to defend ourselves, would we be "insurgents" or "patriots"?

That word drives me nuts!

[GreatAuntK]

24. I can't believe

I just read a debate about whether you can oppose the war and support the troops. I hardly ever talk about the war without mentioning, Bush lied.

[karlrschneider]

27. I can believe just about anything in these Orwellian times...

:eyes:
Or maybe it's that I believe nothing at all. What's a philosophunculist to do?

[karlrschneider]

25. Good question. Do they answer?

;-)

[juslikagrzly]

29. Sadly, no.

They just sputtered and fumed and gaped open-mouthed at me :-(

[karlrschneider]

31. Not sure whether to laugh or cry, then...

:eyes:
:D :cry:

[juslikagrzly]

33. First you cry, then you get mad

then you DO. I have been closely watching the language I use and consciously change war to occupation, pro-life to anti-choice, etc. etc. Baby steps admittedly, but it helps.

[merh]

34. That is what got me banned from FR. I really knew nothing about

the political blogs, I had no idea DU existed. One rainy afternoon I was bored and happened upon FR. I replied to someone who said basically we needed to just nuke Iraq by asking them to consider the similarites between the invasion in Iraq and the civil war. Many southerners do not recognize that in the true sense of the word, the Rebels were not patriots to the USofA, they were the insurgents, they were the traitors. Rebels fought against the US soldiers. Yes, southerners resented the fact that the Union was trying to force its values on the south and was trying to change their way of life by spreading the Union's concept of democracy, thus a war broke out. The Union invaded the south. I asked them how that was different from what was going on in Iraq, were not the Iraqis allowed to defend their homes and way of life?

Well, I was attacked, called a troll and told to go back to DU. I was banned, but am grateful that they mentioned DU. I found DU and I don't post at FR. Just going over there makes me ill.

[ginnyinWI]

38. I'm not calling it either one, I'm

going to call it "Bush's War" because that is what it is. There is power in words. I'm also not going to say "neo-cons" or "conservatives" anymore when I mean to say "radical rightists" because that is what they are--radical. You can expand that to say "religious radicals" for the evangelical right. Radicals want to change society in extreme ways, so the label fits well.