« Cleaver takes a stand | Main | ‘War on terror’ »

August 17, 2006

World war rhetoric

“The recent arrests that our fellow citizens are now learning about are a stark reminder that this nation is at war with Islamic fascists,” President Bush said last week in Green Bay, Wis.

I think that using the term “Islamic fascists” is part of a strategy designed by conservatives to make political gains by invoking World War II metaphors.

The “war on terror,” war in Iraq and war in Lebanon have been lumped together under the unsaid label of World War III. Negotiation or diplomacy is deemed appeasement. The leaders of Iran and Hezbollah are like Adolf Hitler.

The glory of this metaphor is that it is extremely effective in garnering support. The crime of this metaphor is that it encapsulates simplistic dinosaur thinking.

Fighting the war on terror effectively means implementing progressive strategies like superior police work, intelligence gathering and the creation of alliances through diplomacy.

Relying on World War II metaphors, rhetoric and strategies may bolster approval ratings, but it has nothing to do with keeping our soldiers in Iraq and American citizens safe.

Patricia Williams
Kansas City

Comments

CRD

Read this commentary and especially view the video clip from Joe Scarborough on Bush:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13345463/#060816a

openmind

Remember the good ol' days when Bush was just an innocent idiot mispronouncing words and saying dumb things. He went from "cute" crazy to "scary" crazy pretty darn quick.

Femmecine

I understand your cynicism concerning politicians, Jack, however, I've never before in my life considered that the politicians in power could literally destroy the world. And on purpose.

The fact that Bush buys into the looney notion that there's got to be an Apocalypse or end of the world happening in the Middle East struck me as just being too absurd when he first got in office.

Now I am sure that he is doesn't care how bad the wars get, because he thinks he will be smiling down from his cloudy paradise(only without 40 virgins because Fundies don't believe in the fun of sex) while the rest of the world burns.

This whole crazy belief system of his freaks me out.

Why else would he try to "egg on" Muslims by calling them Islamic fascists.

jack

For there to be any progress, our foreign policy must cease to be developped for the sole purpose of supporting Karl Rove written sound bites.

I do hava as much problems with the words "Democrats"" and "truth" being in the same sentence as I do with "Republicans" and "truth" in a sentence.

They are all lying, weasel, politicians. It's just that the lying, weasel Republicanns are in power right now.

bamapana

The rhetoric has been ridiculous. It’s time to listen to Democratic party leaders when they tell us that, “Iraq has become a point of attraction and recruitment of qualified resources.” All the while “the mujahideen,” have “managed to breach all the security measures adopted by.. the coalition time and again.” Democrats are honest enough to tell us that “the evidence of this is the bombings . . in the capitals of the most important European countries” of the coalition.

While the administration ramps up its rhetoric, the Democratic Party will tell us the truth, that Bush's argument is false and that he avoids confronting the substance of opinion polls that is when it comes to withdrawing the troops, is “that it is better not to fight the Muslims on their land and for them not to fight us on our land.”

This November we must elect the people who will work toward their promise of “a long-term truce” where “both parties will enjoy security and stability and we will build Iraq and Afghanistan, which were destroyed by the war.” This is the kind of leadership we won’t get from the Republicans.

Femmecine

You may be right, Whispering. Bush certainly made it clear that he was on a Crusade when he first kicked off hostilities.

This latest "trick" to link with WWII has been pretty prevalent on blogs and talk radio. Newt Gingrich kicked off with an op-ed a few weeks ago and generally gets credit for using the term, "WWIII".

Some of the talk radio bullies have been playing lots of old clips of Chamberlain and Churchill. The thought of Bush being compared to Churchill as a statesman is pretty absurd.

My question for all these bloviators is: "If this is really World War III and not just a PR ruse, shouldn't you be instituting a draft, so you might actually win the war?" "And shouldn't the chickenhawks be getting off their duffs to volunteer to fight in this most important and major war?"

whispering_to_kc

We were struck on 9-11 by terrorist citizens of Saudi Arabia(15), the UAE(2), Egypt(1), and Lebanon (1).

The busted up airliner bombing of last week was planned by British citizens of Pakistani heritage.

Saudi Osama bin Laden is still on the loose in Afghanistan.

Conclusion: the war on terror is in Iraq, Iran and Lebanon.

Strange.

whispering_to_kc

I think that using the term "Islamic fascists" is part of a strategy designed by conservatives to make political gains by invoking metaphors of the Crusades.

Wars over religion are always popular.

 
About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About Knight Ridder | Copyright