It must be nice to know you can change definitions and positions whenever it suits you and you can always hide behind otherwise well-meaning folks like Dominic when challenged.
But here goes anyway. When the President declared "Mission Accomplished" to the military back in 2003 it was the media and the Democrats who insisted we were still in a "war", because the war mission was not yet accomplished according to them. They--and this includes you, Ed--created the "frame" that says the "war"'s objective was not accomplished, and wouldn't be, until there was peace and a new stable government in Iraq. And they ridiculed Bush for even suggesting we'd achieved anything after the end of major combat operations. Now that we have helped the Iraqis repel the sunni reactionaries and Al Qaeda foreign terrorists (no thanks to your side, by the way) and seen them through creating a new constitution and holding free elections in the midst of sectarian challenges (over your objections that democracy was clearly NOT something Iraqis or arabs generally could handle), you NOW want to say we were actually "done" back when Bush said the military accomplished their objective and since then we are nothing more than reviled "occupiers". And Rove invented the term "war" for political advantage? What advantage? Have you looked at the polls? The term "war" was useful to the LEFT, as long as there was the semblance of ongoing "combat," which the media helped portray every time an amateur roadside bomb went off and killed a couple people, or some lunatic kidnapped a civilian and video-taped the lobbing off of their head. After all, how can you rally an "anti-war" coalition without a "war" going on? Now that they have their anti-war coalition swelled up to near Woodstock proportions, and have gained some political traction for the fall campaign, it's obvious to the meanest intelligence in retrospect that we were done with the "war" back when Bush said we were done. So now it's time for a new pejorative slogan to rally around. Apparently, that word now is "occupation". (I note that the terrorists have been using that term awhile---what took you guys so long to catch up?) Why? Well, it's easy to be against "war" in the abstract, but it's even easier to be against "occupation" (after all, who wants to be ruled by occupiers?). Since it's obvious with the death of Zarqawi that their former position that we were still in a "war" and killing terrorists would only make a thousand more pop up out of the sand is pure BS, we need now to shift our focus to the concept of military "occupation" in the abstract rather than on the concrete achievements both during the war and since, in the reconstruction and ongoing efforts to help the new _democratic_ regime stabilize. I can't believe the negative blinders. Back during the election when our preferred candidates didn't win, it was glibly suggested that we'd failed our "occupation" because we couldn't even competantly plant a good puppet regime. As if that was our intent. Now that we've managed to work successfully with the government that did win in the popular election, and are already looking forward to scaling back our operations in Iraq with the sorry state of the "insurgency" being exposed for what it is after Zarqawi's demise, now it's time to paint our soldiers as indefinite occupiers. I just want to note for the record you just admitted Bush was right when he declared "mission accomplished" and the "war" itself was every bit the "cake-walk" you describe eloquently below. But to call us "occupiers" in the usual sense of the term, in light of our non-military achievements since the end of the "war", is well... Cheap. (Now I'm waiting for Ed's minions to start attacking me for even thinking Ed was suggesting something improper, while Ed sits back, browsing through commondreams.org for ideas about what nonsense to post next ...) - Bob ! -----Original Message----- ! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ! [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Leafe ! Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 8:50 AM ! To: ProFox Mailing List ! Subject: [OT] There is no war in Iraq ! ! A bit of clarity on the proper use of language. There ! is no war in ! Iraq, and it is fallacious to keep calling it that. It is an ! occupation, and has been for over 3 years. ! ! <http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0619-22.htm> ! ! ( -or- http://tinyurl.com/jaaus ) ! ! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ! Every time the media - or a Democrat - uses the phrase "War in Iraq" ! they are promoting one of Karl Rove's most potent Republican Party ! frames. ! ! There is no longer a war against Iraq. ! ! It ended in May of 2003, when George W. Bush stood below a "Mission ! Accomplished" sign aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln and correctly ! declared that we had "victoriously" defeated the Iraqi army and ! overthrown their government. ! ! Our military machine is tremendously good at fighting wars - blowing ! up infrastructure, killing opposing armies, and toppling ! governments. ! We did that successfully in Iraq, in a matter of a few weeks. We ! destroyed their army, wiped out their air defenses, devastated their ! Republican Guard, seized their capitol, arrested their leaders, and ! took control of their government. We won the war. It's over. ! ! What we have now is an occupation of Iraq. ! ! The occupation began when the war ended, and continues to this day. ! According to our own Pentagon estimates, at least ninety five ! percent ! of those attacking our soldiers are Iraqi civilians who view ! themselves as anti-occupation fighters. And last week both the ! Defense Minister and the Vice President of Iraq asked us for a ! specific date on which the occupation would end. ! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ! ! -- Ed Leafe ! -- http://leafe.com ! -- http://dabodev.com ! ! ! ! ! [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
