Last week I was listening to National Public Radio about the imminent invasion of Falluja. What was interesting about this report from a radio station commonly considered "liberal" was the terminology used when describing the United States' plan of attack.
It was said that the United States was going to try to "drive" insurgents from the city. If the word "drive", which has been used so often by the current administration, is meant to be taken literally, then I ask: Where are we driving the insurgents to? The suburbs? And if so, is this plan put forth by our "strong leader" a reasonable plan of action?
After the invasion of Falluja, it has since been reported that the insurgents (which is also a strange title suggesting that they are foreign mercenaries) left the city prior to the invasion and attacked U.S. trained Iraqi police in other areas of the country who had lost the support of U.S. troops now fighting in Falluja. So I ask our "strong leader": mission accomplished?
However, it is very possible that the use of the word "drive" was meant in an entirely different way. Given the President's track record of being completely honest with the American people (and Congress), there is a slight, minutely small chance that this is an attempt to sugar coat the realities of war.
We are not "driving" them out of Falluja, we are killing them, and they are killing us. Many innocent lives will be lost along the way, and this is what war is. This reality is what U.S troops are facing every day, and to tell the American people, who are unanimously in support of our troops, that we are doing anything less than killing and being killed, is doing the troops an injustice.
Photo: Courtesy of Matthew Messina, from the RMBERS' Instagram page
