Perhaps because it makes the occupiers feel morally justified? As if we are defending ourselves against a threatening enemy, when in fact, Iraq was never a threat to us.
The American public and media sure seem to eat it up just fine.
It really disturbs me how seemingly 98% of Americans and the media prefer to call our occupation something other than what it is.
The war was finished over 4 years ago. We defeated and disbanded the Iraqi army. "Mission accomplished". Remember?.
2007-03-23 05:35:37 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Because if the American public was aware that we were occupying that country more people would be outraged. By calling it a war it makes Americans think in terms of us (good) them (bad) thus no national outrage.
2007-03-23 05:41:44 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Your ingredient is surely ultimate. quite the area approximately our thoughts and movements if invaded and occupied via yet another u . s .. no person has the ultimate to impose their values on yet another. And the Iraq saga isn't approximately installation a democracy or insilling any values. those issues are an attempt to flow away the area in a miles better shape than got here across interior the 1st place. In different words a face saving way out. As to the reason we went to Iraq, that's the implicit and specific threat that Saddam's regime posed to US pastimes (not US itself) interior the area. those pastimes incorporate oil, Israel's risk-free practices, Saudi Arabia's stability, and so on. The conflict replaced into certainly a pre-emptive strike against a conceivable threat. And undergo in recommendations Saddam did launch a ask your self invasion against Kuwait a decade in the past, and Saddam did have WMD's, specifically chemical and organic and organic weapons. As to the WMD's the question replaced into not whether he had them or not. the full international knew that he had them till now. The question replaced into the place are they, if destroyed the place is the data? replaced into it offered to terrorists? So on and so on. on account that Saddam did not prefer to grant data of his disposal of the WMD, the U. S. had to flow and make helpful that he does not have them. it fairly is the certainty, whether that isn't the finished certainty, there is plenty extra to it than meets the attention. Diplomatic and different operations are under no circumstances that easy and rightly so. in the event that they printed each little ingredient to extra often than not dumb public, united states of america does not be this large and actually it does not have defeated the chilly conflict with the Soviet Union, and it does not have gained the WW2. All i will say is that, we'd desire to continuously have confidence the government slightly extra, they comprehend plenty extra and have plenty extra materials than we do, so permit's wish that they are doing some thing it fairly is strategically sound and useful to all human beings interior the long-term. in spite of each little thing US isn't the final u . s . via twist of fate.
2016-10-19 10:38:53 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well the Iraqis are allowing the insurgents to occupy Iraq so to a small degree, they deserve what they get. The American troops are there to help keep those murdering insurgents from killing so many innocent people it's just too bad that so many Iraqis don't have the goddamn sense to see the truth. They are only stupid enough to do what their religious leader tell them to see.
2007-03-23 06:07:27 · answer #3 · answered by Kevin A 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
We are defending ourselves. Before the Iraq war, Saddam Hussein was planning on releasing large amounts of oil into the market. This would drive oil prices down, way down. Low oil prices are never good for the economy or environment, so this war is actually helping America.
I would assume, judging on what you have written that you are liberal. Perhaps you will see the truth when you set down your bong.
2007-03-23 05:50:32 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
You need to get a grip and look up the definition of "occupation".
We are in Iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi government. We don't have a flag flying over Iraq, as a matter of fact, we aren't even allow to fly a flag over our own FOB's.
We have no control over the government's decisions although we do have influence with their PM.
Look up the definition and come back.
2007-03-23 05:41:32 · answer #5 · answered by ? 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Not to mention desert "SHIELD", we are poor, helpless, victims trying to defend ourselves...that is freaking ridiculous.
For the same reason, we call illegal immigrants "illegal ALIENS" to make them sound like something bad that is OK to get rid of with whatever means we choose.
2007-03-23 07:12:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because "war" is a shorter word. That's the reason.
And the fact that most people don't actually bother to learn and use words according to their actual definition.
2007-03-23 05:40:18 · answer #7 · answered by coragryph 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
a setting president has authority's under the 'war act' to implement his decisions...occupation doesn't give him as many options, or as much power....
2007-03-23 05:44:38 · answer #8 · answered by olddogwatchin 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
all military conflicts are wars. in the bible it talks about wars not conflicts. a war can be between anybody. even your family members.moonraven/cinderella
2007-03-23 05:44:57 · answer #9 · answered by cinderella 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I think it's all the shooting, bombing, killing, and dieing that has people confused.
2007-03-23 05:46:59 · answer #10 · answered by Studbolt Slickrock Deux 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋