Imagine for a moment you were living on another planet. Imagine that on the other planet there were legitimate journalists with no connections of any kind to governments in our universe. Now imagine you were a journalist on that planet. Imagine hard that you are not an American and for the purpose of this commentary try to detach yourself from any patriotic, home-team, emotional obligations.
Now pretend that you, as a journalist, were covering the events on Earth when the invasion of Iraq occurred. What term would you use to describe the “Coalition” forces, or most specifically the American forces? Even better, what terms would you use to describe the factions who have been fighting the American forces in Iraq?
In America we are told that the Iraqi’s who fight Americans are terrorists. We are told that they are insurgents. We are told they are the enemy. We hear the American media describe the forces who are fighting against Americans in Iraq and against each other, in terms of their alleged conduct…that is to say, in terms of their conduct according to America. For all we know they could simply be freedom fighters; or at least some of them could be. But despite their use of different terms for the ‘enemy,’ we never hear our media describe American troops as anything but American troops. Why is that?
So if you were a journalist on that other planet, what terms would you use to described the participants in the violence taking place in Iraq these days? When you wrote about the Iraqis (at this late stage in the game), you may have to use several terms because at this point a number of brand new “causes” have been created by the invasion, and that has resulted in a wide variety a motivation for the violence. As a responsible journalist you would have to clarify this for your readers. At this point in Iraq, you would have to describe the Iraqi forces as “religious fanatics fighting a civil war”, “vengeance squads” (you see there is a long history in Iraq…one that American’s don’t know much about), “furious native residence who have had family members killed or brutalized by the Americans and have had their homes and lives destroyed by those same Americans”, and you may have to use the term “foreign agitators” who have seized upon the opportunity created by the Americans to weaken America and drain our resources. You would not really use the term “terrorist”. You see a terrorist is one that inflicts harm using sneaky methods, resulting in fear. Terrorists target innocent people in random locations. The attacks taking place in Iraq are taking place on a battlefield. The Americans turned Iraq into a battlefield the moment they dropped the first bomb on a civilian occupied city. The warring factions in Iraq are hitting hard targets, specifically chosen by them. And if one were to believe American logic and reasoning, any innocent people who fall victim to this violence are simply “collateral damage.” And we all know that “collateral damage” is a perfectly acceptable byproduct of war. So if civilians who are killed by Americans are called “collateral damage,” the civilians who are killed by Iraqi fighters should be called “collateral damage” Well, at least some of the killed civilians fall under that category.
Now that we settled that, what term would you use to describe the Americans in Iraq? Surely you would describe them as something other than “Americans”. You would not be able to use the term “defense forces” because they were not being threatened when they invaded Iraq. As a matter of fact, at the time of the invasion Iraq caved in to the pressure of a threat of an invasion and was pretty much cooperating with the international community to prove that it posed no threat. A lot of arm twisting was necessary but lets face it, there was plenty of arm twisting capability available for use when needed. I’ll tell you, I have thought about this for years and I can not think of a better term for the American troops in Iraq than “invaders.” “Occupational forces” don’t even cut it for me. You see they had to invade in order to occupy. As a matter of fact American’s in Iraq are actually currently “illegal aliens!” (Can you hear me Lou Dobbs?) As a matter of fact if Iraq had a Lou Dobbs of their own he would be reporting, every day, about the outsourcing taking place! After all you have all these foreign companies hired to “rebuild” their nation!
Think about it, Americans crossed the borders into Iraq, illegally, took up residence, created a situation where their nation, a foreign nation, America, will make money from Iraqi oil, taking money away from the Iraqi people, and the Iraqi citizens are paying the price. Americans have had a catastrophic impact on the Iraqi economy, health care system, educational system, infrastructure, and American invasion has resulted in the obliteration of Iraqi’s “homeland security.” All this as a result of the new onslaught of illegals into Iraq. Illegals not only from America but brought in by America or attracted there by the American presence there. Mexicans Illegals in America don’t hold a candle to American illegals in Iraq! It is like the difference between trowing a bullet and shooting a bullet; no comparison!
Positive arguments can be made about the American illegals in Iraq, just like the positive arguments being made about the illegal Mexicans in America. The Americans are helping the Iraqis; they are building schools, and they got rid of a tyrant, and they give the children candy…you know…watch Fox News…you’ll see what I mean. And the Mexicans we are told take jobs that Americans don’t want to do, and they provide inexpensive labor, etc. You know…watch the Democrats on C-SPAN. The only difference is…The negative aspects of Mexicans in America pale in comparison to the negative aspects of Americans in Iraq. Can anyone seriously compare crossing a border to wash dishes and get health care for their children to obliterating a nation and stealing their oil money? If I had the time I would do a detailed comparison of the impact of Mexican illegals on America as compared to the impact of American illegals on Iraq; but it really doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see the difference.
So there you have it, the accurate terms for Americans in Iraq are “invaders” and “illegal aliens.” But not just the average illegal alien, like to one’s in America. The America illegals in Iraq were placed there by (and actually are) the most powerful military on Earth! What would Lou Dobbs be saying if the Mexican military played a similar role here!
Here in dreamland, better known as America, people learn about what is going on in the world by listening to pundits and journalists (in America these are one and the same these days), instead of by actually watching the events that take place and making up their own minds. You see as Americans are given information they are simultaneously told how to feel. It’s like that scene in the movie Young Frankenstein where the monster (played by Peter Boyle) is sitting with the old man (played by Gene Hackman) , having wine, (well - trying to, anyway), and the old man offers the monster a cigar. Now the monster is scared of fire so he reacts loudly when the old man goes to light the monster’s cigar. The old man tells the monster “fire good” and the monster accepts this from the old man has he now allows the old man to light his cigar with the “good fire” As the “fire good” attitude takes hold, the old man lights the monster’s finger on fire. For several moments that “fire good” attitude holds steady even as the monster’s finger cooks itself as it is now fully engulfed in flames. Finally the monster cant take it any more and bolts out of there! It is at this point he realizes that in this case fir was bad all along, even though he was told otherwise.
You see, the monster in the movie knew that fire was bad all along but for some reason he trusted the person telling him otherwise. He should have gone with his instincts. So should America when it comes to judging the actions of our government. Think about it!