(Optional Background Sound: "
America, Why I Love Her - John Wayne": High speed connections only)
As we progress through the months and years in Iraq, and consider military options for Iran and Syria, let's take a minute to review some of the language still being used every day in the news, on the streets of your neighborhood, and in the workplace. After enough repetition, it's easy to forget how these phrases become so commonly used and retain a commonly assumed meaning (whether based on fact or not).
Undoubtedly, many of your family members around the Easter brunch table will use at least one of these phrases, if not all of them. Let's be aware of what they really mean, and pay close attention to the context in which they are used. None of these phrases are as simplistic, neutral and agreeable as they sound.
1. "Support the Troops"
Did anyone else ever notice that there's a word missing from this phrase? There is an implied word that begins the sentence, and in fact, it is the subject of the sentence. So, answer this question. Is the implied word "I", or is the implied word "You"? There's a big difference.
If someone wants to drive around with a ribbon that says "I Support the Troops", then I applaud them. Hopefully that also means that they have donated money for body armor and they are rallying Rumsfeld and their representatives to Bring the Troops home, and end things like the stop loss program and the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) loophole.
However, if they are implying, "YOU support the troops", then I respectfully disagree with the sentiment. Each person should make their own choice on supporting the troops, supporting the war, and supporting the president. Their should be no DEMANDS involved when it comes to choosing whether or not to fall prey to to War Propaganda. Like the billboards by the side of the road reinforce: "Unity: It's what makes us great".
2. "Defending OUR Freedom"
Now, WE all know there is NO WAY that the War in Iraq is related to "Defending OUR freedom". Depending on who you are and how many facts you are willing to ignore, you could possibly make the case that we are defending Iraqi freedom, but even that argument is nebulous. If we found WMDs or connections to al Qaeda, you might have been able to even convince me that the troops were "Defending our Country". But there is no scenario in which they are "Defending our Freedom".
Yet, throughout military history, EVERY war is "sold" as necessary for "Defending our freedom". This one is as old as the day is long, but it's even being used in the War on Terror.
You can even see it prominently in the Thank You Note section of DefendAmerica.mil. The only option the Dept. of Defense gives you for the thank you message is this:
Dear member of the U.S. military:
Thank you for
defending our freedom.
Signed
Your name
Yeah, ok. Whatever. I'd actually like to send a thank you note to a soldier, but I'll pass on that particular one.
3. "Terrorist"
Take just the simple word "terrorist", for example. These days, it is used to describe virtually everybody who takes up arms against Americans. The angry Iraqi dad, whose family was lost when their house was bombed during dinner, is now a terrorist. He has dark skin, he has taken up arms against those who killed his family, and those people are Americans, so he must be a "terrorist." An Iraqi college kid who wanted to have political meetings with his friends is held at Abu Ghraib prison and abused, all because he is a "terrorist." The guy blowing up a roadside bomb because he came from Syria to kill Americans is a terrorist also. Only one of these three people is actually a terrorist, but they are all portrayed using the same language.
Check out this Dept. of Defense Press Release from today, and notice all of the different ways "terrorist" is used.
They could have been Bathists (Per Seymour Hersh), they could have been angry Iraqi civilians, or they could have been actual terrorists imported from another country. It's impossible to tell, not that they EVER make a distinction anyway.
4. "Patriotic"
How many times have I heard a suburban Conservative call Liberals "unpatriotic"? Thousands of times. At work, in the store, during holidays at the dinner table, and certainly on the radio. However, Teddy Roosevelt had a slightly different interpretation of Patriotism, as he said in 1899:
"Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does NOT mean to stand by the President or any other public official save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country."
I have a relative who says to me, "What's bad for America is good for the Democrats." Straight from Rush Limbaugh obviously, but I've never told him I know that. I respond with, "Define America. Are you defining America as America's government? America's military? The American people? Actually, if it's bad for America in the Middle East, it's bad for Bush. Since Bush is bad for the American people (clearly - on so many levels), then if it's bad for Bush it's good for American people. So, really, if it's bad for American government, it's probably good for the American people." He doesn't like that much. I guess I'm unpatriotic.
Happy Easter to all.