Search This Site


Thursday, March 29, 2007

Iraqupation, As I Said...

Thank you Nicole Belle at Crooks and Liars:
I made a big deal a couple of months ago of not allowing the White House to frame the debate on Bush's "surge" and to refer to it as it plainly is: an escalation. Unfortunately, it's been pointed out to me that I need to follow my own advice and stop referring to our military action in Iraq as a "war," but what it truly is: an occupation. And that's absolutely right. To call it a war lends credibility that Bush's actions do not deserve.

I made this very point over three weeks ago (excerpt):
First of all, we need to stop calling this aggression in Iraq a "war." It is an occupation, and I wish I had the readership (hell, any readership) to help turn this narrative. Far too many people characterize it as a "mistake," or that it was executed "incompetently" (Arthur Silber's deconstruction of John Edwards' problem clarifies the matter far better than I can, and the essay neatly encapsulates the thrall in which most Americans are ensconced.) These characterizations are helpful towards the end of masking the responsibility we all share for what is going on there.

There never was an Iraq "war."

No comments:

Post a Comment

I welcome all reactions and points of view, so comments here are not moderated. Cheerfully "colorful" language is great. I'll even tolerate some ad hominem directed against me... each other, not so much. Racist or excessively abusive comments (or spam) will be deleted at my discretion.