Does changing the name change the meaning?
CNN reports– Former Secretary of State Colin Powell said Wednesday Iraq’s violence meets the standard of “civil war”. Powell says if it were up to he might recommend the administration uses that term.
Bush has avoided using the term “civil war” to describe the problems in Iraq.
Tuesday, he referred to the latest violence as “part of a pattern” of attacks by al Qaeda in Iraq to divide Shiites and Sunnis.
How American like you see… when something sounds real bad, just re-word it so it has its’ own way of sounding just that much better to reassure people.
I didn’t realize in college when I heard a speech on euphemisms by George Carlin that the same speech must be on re-peat at the white house.
For all of you who have not heard the speech, surely go listen to it now. The words are funny but the truth is there.
Carlin, throughout his segment says something like this….( For a full version you must go online and look it up)
In W.W. I when a fighting person’s nervous system was stressed or it’s was at its peak and they couldn’t take it anymore, their nervous system had either snapped or was about to snap the term was called Shell shock. By W.W.II the same condition was called Battle Fatigue, by the Korean War it was called operational exhaustion and by Viet Nam is was changed to what we know now as Post traumatic stress disorder. Basically the pain gets buried away under jargon Carlin says.
Carlin also mentions how false teeth are now dental appliances, trailers are mobile homes, wife beating became intermittent explosive disorder and a peephole now sounds not so wrong with the name observation point.
I believe Iraq has been in a civil war for decades and just because we don’t call it that does not mean that is not what is happening. Two sides of the country at war, isn’t that what we would call a civil war or was it part of a pattern?
It’s late I guess I will head home because the weather looks pretty nice today. It is partly sunny or as it used to be called partly cloudy.
November 30th, 2006 at 1:01 pm
You make many good points in your article. I would like to supplement them with some information:
I am a 2 tour Vietnam Veteran who recently retired after 36 years of working in the Defense Industrial Complex on many of the weapons systems being used by our forces as we speak.
If you are interested in a view of the inside of the Pentagon procurement process from Vietnam to Iraq please check the posting at my blog entitled, “Odyssey of Armements”
http://www.rosecoveredglasses.blogspot.com
The Pentagon is a giant,incredibly complex establishment,budgeted in excess of $500B per year. The Rumsfelds, the Adminisitrations and the Congressmen come and go but the real machinery of policy and procurement keeps grinding away, presenting the politicos who arrive with detail and alternatives slanted to perpetuate itself.
How can any newcomer, be he a President, a Congressman or even the Sec. Def. to be - Mr. Gates- understand such complexity, particulary if heretofore he has not had the clearance to get the full details?
Answer- he can’t. Therefor he accepts the alternatives provided by the career establishment that never goes away and he hopes he makes the right choices. Or he is influenced by a lobbyist or two representing companies in his district or special interest groups.
From a practical standpoint, policy and war decisions are made far below the levels of the talking heads who take the heat or the credit for the results.
This situation is unfortunate but it is ablsolute fact. Take it from one who has been to war and worked in the establishment.
This giant policy making and war machine will eventually come apart and have to be put back together to operate smaller, leaner and on less fuel. But that won’t happen unitil it hits a brick wall at high speed.
We will then have to run a Volkswagon instead of a Caddy and get along somehow. We better start practicing now and get off our high horse. Our golden aura in the world is beginning to dull from arrogance.