Sanding Word Edges by pendragon David Whelan War is interesting because it’s an awfully brutal political function that the politicians would rather not talk about. In part, it may be that Clausewitz’ “politics by other means” is no longer as common amongst developed nations, and so the rise in euphemisms is increasingly necessary. Who’s being fooled, though, by the pretense of media and politicians.
Here are my favorites:
security contractor a person who is hired by a for-profit operation to carry military weapons and follow military rules of engagement. a.k.a. mercenary
insurgent a person indigenous to a nation that is occupied by a hostile, foreign power who bears arms and fights the occupation force U.S.: patriot (circa 1789)
limited sovereignty This concept, floated recently by the White House, is meant to explain why Iraqis will have self-determination, even though their country will be controlled politically, economically, and militarily by an American occupation force. Since sovereignty means unfettered control, limited sovereignty doesn’t seem possible. It’s like saying (as Bush might have in his first 40 years), “I was only a bit drunk”. Or like Dick Cheney saying, “I’m only engaged in limited oil exploration, because I’ve only destroyed all vegetation, not affected the mineral deposits”. a.k.a. occupation
It’s not that I don’t support the troops and what they are doing, but the fact that they are doing their best in an unjustifiable war against a population that does not appear to want the benefits of the Bush America, does not negate the underlying issue that they should not be there in the first place.