Richard WarnickSpencer Ackerman Explains: ‘Enemies With Benefits’ and Other Iraq War Euphemisms
Spencer Ackerman tackles the Bush administration’s Orwellian assault on the English language as it applies to Iraq:
Few governments have relied more on euphemism than the Bush administration. Euphemism is different from spin. Spin puts the best face forward on a given policy; euphemism uses its opposite to describe itself. Hence the Clear Skies Initiative to weaken the Clean Air Act; the Freedom Agenda to describe military domination of the Middle East; or Enhanced Interrogation to discuss torture.
The Iraq War has been characterized by euphemism since its inception. The name “Operation Iraqi Freedom” denotes a foreign military occupation of Iraq endlessly described as liberation — a term that, in practice, means the absolute opposite of any common-sense definition of “freedom.” For over five years, foreign troops have enjoyed the legal right to kill any Iraqi whom commanders deem fit to kill; to search any house commanders deem fit to search; and to detain any Iraqi whom commanders deem fit to detain. This is, clearly, a condition Americans would never accept for themselves. Debate can reasonably occur over whether the war is worth it or whether the rules of engagement are appropriate. But no one can responsibly call this condition “freedom” for Iraqis.
The entire article is a must-read. Here’s a choice snippet on the subject of the “former” Sunni insurgents on the American payroll that the U.S. military now calls the Concerned Local Citizens (CLC) and “Sons of Iraq.”
An Iraq War veteran who worked with the CLCs/Sons of Iraq recently came up with a better term on his blog for those who’d stop shooting at him if they’d get money out of it: “Enemies with Benefits.” Alas, it appears not to have caught on yet.
Previous One Utah post:
An Iraq Glossary (December 14, 2007)
Iraq: Can’t Tell Who We’re Fighting Without a Scorecard (April 9, 2008)
