Are we at "war" in Iraq?

Question

Why does everyone still use the phrase "Iraq War" or "War in Iraq" for what is obviously not a war, but an occupation?

Does Bush gain points with his base for being a "War President" instead of an "Occupation President"?

Do the Democrats score with their base by being "Anti-War" instead of "Anti-Occupation"?

lets have some truth in language.

I am not saying that the invasion of Iraq was good or bad or wahtever. I am just saying that we are not at war with Iraq. We are occupying Iraq.

Please address the fact that BOTH sides use the word "war" for political gain, which is deplorable. Dems seem to be having an especially hard time with this concept, being totally devoted to being anti-war.

Also, I'm not talking about the overall war on terrorism, just about Iraq.

Also, when a REAL war comes, and it will, all you crybabies will think back to these days as a walk in the park.

Answer 1

Truth in language would be (in my opinion) that we are an occupying force in the middle of a civil war in between two sects of a fundamentally good religion who are fighting to establish their version of either a Shiite or Sunni theocracy.

Answer 2

We won the 'conventional' war in about three weeks. Then came the occupation. Then came the civil war on top of the occpation. The Bush Junta was and still is unprepared and unable to cope with the situation that 'winning the war' part of the equation fostered. At this time to be truthful it's a civil war, sunni vs shiite, a war of resistance, sunni and shiite against the US military and their collaborators and a totally lame military 'occupation' that's going nowhere,mainly because it has nowhere to go...except on and on! Bush can delude himself all he wants, but if he's a 'war president' then he's a losing war president. The sooner this bum and his goofy cold war retread handlers get the hell out of Washington the better for everyone!
At least then we can start to sort this #$%^ up out!

Answer 3

well. there is a "fight" or war going on INSIDE the occupied country of Iraq between us and a few other "players" for the outcome and future of the Iraq nation, so yes we are at war.

the other players is a small but tenacious group of alqaeda, and the main fight which is sectarian violence, due to old hatred, between Sunnies and Shiites....so yes there is a war going on in Iraq....a follow-on war that should not had happened IF we had done the occupation correctly from the end of the invasion in 03, by having the real numbers of troops needed in there for a proper occupation...


http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A10161-2004May8?language=printer


1

Answer 4

It's an OCCUPATION alright. Don't be fooled by those who still believe we are in Iraq "fighting for our freedom". Get real! Iraq was never a threat to our freedom. That's been pointedly clear since the WMD propoganda was disspelled. Bush not only gets points for this terminology, but validation for all the tax dollars going to pay on those no-bid contracts that his base is profitting from. The point that we are fighting them "over there" so we won't have to fight them "over here" is ludicrous. It intimates that ALL terrorists are in Iraq..... and they're NOT. It is entirely possible for us to be attacked over HERE, while our troops are busy occupying over there. Then what? As for the democrats.... Until they start relentlessly hammering the point that it is time to bring our troops home, I don't know what to believe. Is it a lack of "guts"? Or, do those war profits stretch past just the Republicans? Something's not right. One thing is certain, though. I, for one, am not going to listen to anymore of the cute little phrases the president uses to keep our troops in Iraq. So, to anyone who wants to say I'm unpatriotic, or unsupportive of our troops...... SAVE IT. I know I love my country, and I support our troops so much that I want them home - ALIVE. Unlike Bush, who supports them to the death - for money. Now, in my book....THAT'S UNPATRIOTIC - and unspeakably heartless.

PEACE..... Take action.

Answer 5

As long as more than a few thousand people have been killed in a conflict, and hostilities continue, a state of war can correctly be said to exist.

We're still losing between two and four soldiers a day on average. No way around it, we're still at war.

Answer 6

They shoot at us - we shoot back. They plant IUD's, we drop bombs.
Yeah, I guess anyone who is opposed to the use of the term "war" is simply arguing semantics.
Note: The Islamic radicals have declared war against the United States - and any other country that won't convert to Islam, for that matter. This declaration had nothing to do with any "occupation" - it was simply an extension of their ideology of hatred and domination.

Answer 7

In case you forget, the democratically elected Iraqi government wants us there, so it's no longer an occupation.

Answer 8

Truth in language would have to include the botched invasion, failed policies and the propoganda used to justify the invasion.

Answer 9

freakin outstanding point!!
keep 'em comming.