Website review: Dangerous Intersection & Blog Arch...
ozinm discovered this in Politics
•33 reviews since Apr 13, 2007
politics, iraq, war
•dangerousintersection.org
People who like this website
- vpynchon
Los Angeles
- ten4sean
Los Angeles
- LilLadyLonghorn
California
- dodgecharger
Big Sur
- RossTaben
Santa Cruz
- howardpark
Sunnyvale
- skyziegler
Oakland
- Mokshala
Berkeley
- Bradley
San Francisco
- Catman-Do
Near San Francisc…
StumbleUpon is the best way to discover great web sites, videos, photos, blogs and more - based on your interests.
Everything is submitted and rated by the community. Discover, share and review the best of the web!
Reviews of this website
imanxman rated 8 months ago- From the page: "For a long time now, I've been deeply frustrated and annoyed by the ongoing use of the term "war" to describe the situation in Iraq. Pardon me, but the "war" in Iraq ended several years ago, when all of their troops surrendered. What we have there now is a military occupation. You might think this is an unimportant matter of semantics, but it is not. It is a very useful matter of semantics if you happen to be a Bush-loving, neo-con Republican. "
- yobaba rated 8 months ago
- Why is a "war" better than a "military occupation?" "War" implies a threat, which makes garnering public support much, much easier. "War" demands money. "War" demands resources. "War" demands increased military production. "War" demands lives. "War" is romantic, attracting both patriotic individuals who want to serve their country, and military and political leaders who want to cloak themselves in it. Bush supporters like to call him the "war president" -- do you think any would call him the "military occupation president?" Some of the comments to this essay are brilliant.
- trovemulo rated 12 months ago
- A plea not to refer to "war" in Iraq.
- Strangersoul rated 12 months ago
- Stop calling it "war" I really don't understand when the whole base of war is proved fake then what we need to know more. Or the whole world need to go round and round....... Nodoubt this simple understanding or words can change the whole perception but there is also a greater lie to be questioned too.......
- FergusMurray rated 13 months ago
- Interesting point about the use of the word 'war' to describe the situation in Iraq.
- curly789er rated 14 months ago
- From the page: Stop calling it "war" April 13th, 2007 by grumpypilgrim For a long time now, I've been deeply frustrated and annoyed by the ongoing use of the term "war" to describe the situation in Iraq. Pardon me, but the "war" in Iraq ended several years ago, when all of their troops surrendered. What we have there now is a military occupation. You might think this is an unimportant matter of semantics, but it is not. It is a very useful matter of semantics if you happen to be a Bush-loving, neo-con Republican. Why is a "war" better than a "military occupation?" "War" implies a threat, which makes garnering public support much, much easier. "War" demands money. "War" demands resources. "War" demands increased military production. "War" demands lives. "War" is romantic, attracting both patriotic individuals who want to serve their country, and military and political leaders who want to cloak themselves in it. Bush supporters like to call him the "war president" "" do you think any would call him the "military occupation president?" "War" justifies autocratic leadership. "War" justifies sacrifices in personal liberties. "War" justifies espionage, both at home and abroad. "War" justifies sending large numbers of soldiers to be killed or maimed. "War" justifies killing people, even innocent people. "War" justifies prison camps. "War" sometimes even justifies torture. When does a military occupation justify any of this? "War" creates images of valor and heroism. "War" creates the myth of an innocent nation fighting back to protect itself. "War" creates "the enemy." And not just any ordinary enemy (e.g., a terrorist hiding in an Afganistan cave), but a worthy enemy: "global terrorism." Who is the enemy in a military occupation? Insurgents. Locals. Nobodies. In sum, "war" is what neo-con Republicans want every American to call the situation in Iraq, because this one word gives them more power than they could possibly get any other way. It is time we stop calling it "the war in Iraq," and time we start calling it what it is: the military occupation of Iraq. This is not just semantics. It is a matter of life and death.
- Joe-B-one rated 14 months ago
- war is what neo-con Republicans want every American to call the situation in Iraq, because this one word gives them more power than they could possibly get any other way. It is time we stop calling it the war in Iraq, and time we start calling it what it is: the military occupation of Iraq. This is not just semantics. It is a matter of life and death.
- AlphaDawg rated 15 months ago
- But then what shall we call our war on terror? But yeah! yeah! What if we do pull out of Iraq?! Answer: Well, then Americans will stop being killed in Iraq as a result of their people not wanting us there.
- the-elite-freak rated 15 months ago
From the page: "Stop calling it a war"
