First, this is not an anti-Hillary diary but the impetus to bring up this point came from watching her speech last night after her victories. This phrase in particular inspired me to write this.
We're ready to reach out to our allies and confront our shared challenges. We're ready to end the war in Iraq and win the war in Afghanistan.
I haven't followed the speeches by other Democratic contenders enough to know if similar rhetoric is used but, if it is, referring to either of these situations as "wars" exposes a huge weakness and gives the advantage to the Republicans. Americans require that we be a winner of a war.
It's time (actually the time came long ago) to put the term "war" back into its more traditional context, that of uniformed armies representing truly governed countries facing off across a battlefield lobbing projectiles at one another.
There was a war in Iraq while Saddam Hussein's ragtag but very identifiable army held together in the face of our massive and deadly assualt. We all know how quickly that organized structure splintered and gave ground. We won decisively and overwhelmingly and the day our chimp-like President got to stand on that aircraft carrier playing army man with his codpiece and declare victory, our role in Iraq became one of occupiers.
Afghanistan was never a traditional war and is not one today. The government there had faded years before and the actions we had to take were simply eradicating armed bandits and thugs all without identifiable features other than turbans, beards, and AK-47's.
The worst of the labels of course is "The War on Terror". How we let the Republicans get away with this one is beyond me. Yeah 9/11 was a terrorist act and scared the snot out of all of us but terrorism is a tactic not an army. Even Al-Quaeda is not an army in a traditional sense. If we narrowed the scope of our "War on Terror" to the "War on Al-Quaeda", we'd be closer to the traditional definition but the enemy would be as fleeting and diverse as if we had a "War on Gangs". Every country in the world and every community in our own country has some form of gang with varying degrees of influence, problems, and even advantages to the areas they occupy. Often communities police themselves in regards to the gangs as I imagine Iraq would begin doing once we left. It's common knowledge that neither the Sunni or Shiite communities there view Al-Quaeda as a welcome neighbor. It's ridiculous to allow John McCain to get away with the notion that they'd take over Iraq if we left.
Now Afghanistan is messy but once again not a true war. The fight there is not to defeat the Taliban or Al-Quaeda completely but to somehow build up the infrastructure of the country while holding those idiots at bay so that the innocent locals have some hope and economic power in their lives besides the lure of opium production and violence. Besides, most of the thugs we're fighting there have their bases in Pakistan. Are we at war with that country then?
Please Democrats, Progressives, and humans - stop using these terms "War in Iraq" and "War in Afghanistan" because we then become locked into winning and losing. There is no winning in either situation and whoever becomes the next President becomes tagged with being the Commander in Chief of a lost war or the unthinkable happens as John McCain has said and we become embroiled in perpetual war which will destroy our country from within.
Every last one of us must stop using these terms and correct every reference to them immediately. We are occupiers of both countries. An occupation has a noble end and that is our goal.
The "War on Terror" is an invalid label and our goal there is intelligence and strong police actions to try to thwart the attacks before they happen and bring the criminals to justice should they strike while at the same time looking to improve the lives and education of the people in the areas where terrorism breeds.
Why are we so keen to play into the Republican talking points? Why can't we define our own and ridicule the chickenhawks that throw these terms out in their pursuit of power through fear?
The concept of war destroys hope in the countries that rely on its use as a tool of international relations and it only brings strength when it's used as a measure of last resort.