I agree with B*sh: Iraq is not in a civil war

[Fridays Child]

I tried this argument last night, under a different thread title, and it got no traction, at all. The point I was trying to make is that, by framing Iraq as being in a civil war, we hand the semantic advantage to Bush.

In my opinion, our side needs to reframe this issue. Iraq is in a sectional war, based on conflicting ideologies, much the same as was our own civil war. But, unlike our civil war, the government has not split apart, and this is where Bush's argument wins.

Here is my previous post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1842983&mesg_id=1842983

[Rex]

1. Iraq is in total anarchy, nothing like a civil war.

The BFEE has destroyed Iraq as a sovereign nation. Wonder whois next?

[karlrschneider]

2. That's a distinction with a difference too subtle to matter to the

29 percenters. I think you're wrong in believing the term "civil war" is advantageous to the RWers.
But I could be wrong too.

[Fridays Child]

5. His ability to deny the civil war allegation on reasonable grounds...

...helps him by making us appear unreasonable. That's his side's best trick--making our arguments seem less than reasonable.

In any case, the 29 percenters aren't our audience. They'd hang on to Bush even if he personally delivered burning bags of dog poop to their front doors. Our concern needs to be the "movable middle" and, to the extent that they are capable of grasping subtleties, we should hone our arguments.

[poverlay]

3. Excellent point.. I think the phrase "cluster-*#@$" comes pretty close,

but we need to come up with something a little more sophisticated to soothe and manipulate the ignorant masses...

Sectional war is pretty good, needs something though.
I'll mull on it for a bit.

[Fridays Child]

17. Yes, we need a meme that will resonate with the public.

I'm not making this argument very successfully to the other posters but, with Congress threatening to make him obtain re-authorization to deploy troops in Iraq if it descends into civil war, Bush has a lot riding on maintaining the perception that it's not happening.

[rfrrfrrfr]

4. I don't see it.

I don't understand how anyone could even think a civil war in Iraq, which is exactly what we have had for some time now, would be a plus for Bush.

This is a "Somehow I told you so. Just doesn't say it." moment for us. It is something we can beat the rethugs over the heads with if we so choose to do so. It doesn't matter if you think we never should have gone in in the first place, or if you think we should have gone in just not in the time, place, or manner in which Bush chose to.

This was a war of choice on Bush's part. There is no excuse he or anyone in his administration can give for the mess we have now. Just as if Iraq had turned out to be all roses and parades Bush would have rightly been given the credit so to must he and his administration accept responsibility for the current fiasco that is Iraq.

This administration is all about avoiding responsibility and accountability and we need to beat them over the head with it.

[Fridays Child]

7. Compared to the American Civil War, a crucial feature of which was...

...secession of the southern states and formation of an entirely separate government, Iraq is not in a civil war. Obviously, the definition of civil war isn't restricted to the above but that's the argument that Bush is making.

And civil war is not a plus for Bush but denying it is. Keep in mind, too, that Congress is now saying Bush may need re-authorization to deploy troops there, if Iraq descends into civil war. Bush doesn't want to withdraw our troops, so he will do whatever he can to argue against the perception that Iraq is in a civil war.

[wildwww2]

6. The government has not split apart? It`s a freaking bad joke to begin with

Vietnam had elections and they did not amount to a pile of feces. Iraq has had elections and the so called government that was elected is about as solid as a freshly deposited dog turd. Iraqi government is already squashed flat in my opinion. Who says you must have some kind of government to have a civil war? Is it just because our country had one to split at the time of ours. Bu$h`s argument is drunken hog wash as usual and I am not swallowing any of it. Iraq has been in a civil war for a long time now. Bu$h got it started by his stupidity and the military industrial complex which is owned by his faithful supporters are getting rich off of it everyday. And our cannon fodder troops are caught in the middle of this mess, being killed and maimed. Agree with Bu$h all you want he is wrong too.
Peace
Wildman
Al Gore is My President

[Fridays Child]

8. It's all about perceptions, not facts.

We need to be better warriors in the arena of perception, especially given that the RNC controls the corporate media.

We ignore this reality at our peril.

[meldroc]

9. Whatever you call it (I call it a civil war)

Iraq as a country is pretty much dead. The Sunnis, Shias & Kurds are not going to be able to come to an agreement to live together in one country peacefully. I'm seeing a 3-way split, into a Kurdish country (Turkey's dreaded Kurdistan,) a Sunni country, and a Shia country, which is likely to be annexed by Iran.

And to quote Axl Rose, "What's so civil 'bout war anyways?"

[Fridays Child]

16. And our troops are in the crossfire. With Congress now threatening...

...to make Bush get re-authorization to deploy troops there, if Iraq descends into a civil war, it matters big timethat Bush is able to slip through a semantic loophole on the issue.

[sendero]

10. When a government has no control..

.. over its people, whether or not it has "split" is moot.

[Fridays Child]

15. It's not moot. See post #13.

[kurth]

11. Any other name for that fucked-up mess would still smell

SHIT.

[Fridays Child]

13. It's perception that counts and our troops are on the line.

Congress is now saying Bush may need re-authorization to deploy troops there, if Iraq descends into civil war. Bush doesn't want to withdraw our troops, so he will do whatever he can to argue against the perception that Iraq is in a civil war.

[cgrindley]

12. It doesn't matter whether you call them deck chairs or

lounge chairs, the fucking Titanic is still sinking.

[Fridays Child]

14. It matters. Please see my post at #13.

[BuyingThyme]

18. The "semantic advantage" is all ours. They're on record

denying civil war for year after year. We can't lose.

[Fridays Child]

19. As long as Bush can deny it in a manner that resonates...

...with the public, not only does our side lose but our troops remain in the crossfire.