Most independent observers would have to admit that there isn't anything
"civil" about it.


PEACE
Steven R. Linnabary, Treasurer
Franklin County Libertarian Party
(614) 891-8841
P.O.Box#115;  Blacklick, OH  43004-0115

"When you make peaceful revolution impossible, you make violent revolution
inevitable"  John F. Kennedy


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Corey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Yahoo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 5:13 AM
Subject: [Libertarian] Is Iraq a civil war? Scholars say yes. Media debate
it.


>
>   Is Iraq a civil war? Scholars say yes. Media debate it.
>   http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1130/p01s02-ussc.html?s=hns
>
>   Sensitive to bias charges, news outlets have avoided the term 'civil
war,' but now that's changing.
>
>   By Linda Feldmann | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
>
>   WASHINGTON
>
>   Bit by bit, the mainstream media are referring to the war in Iraq as a
"civil war" in news coverage. NBC News took the leap on Monday. The Los
Angeles Times and The New York Times have made the switch. Other news
organizations are still using "sectarian conflict" or "on the verge of civil
war," but are actively debating using the more loaded term, which the Bush
administration still eschews.
>
>   Most scholars who study war view the Iraq situation as a civil war; the
only debate is when it became one - in 2004 when the US transferred
sovereignty to Iraqis, or early this year when the bombing of a Shiite
mosque in Samarra sparked a wave of sectarian violence that continues?
Academics cite the standard definition of civil war: groups from the same
country fighting for political control, and a death toll of at least 1,000.
A majority of Americans view the conflict as a civil war, polls show.
>
>   The debate over terminology seems to have sprung from the latest surge
in sectarian violence, and perhaps from a greater sense of freedom among US
media, after the November elections, to call the situation as they see it
without being accused of political bias, analysts say.
>
>   "It's a political debate, not a semantic debate or a theoretical
debate," says David Gergen, a professor at Harvard's Kennedy School of
Government and a former adviser to four US presidents of both parties. "In
politics, the conventional wisdom has held for some time that if the public
concludes our soldiers were in the middle of a civil war, they would think
it hopeless and want to withdraw quickly."
>
>   Mr. Gergen says the administration's resistance to the term is
understandable. "Calling it a civil war, in the minds of many supporters of
the war, could pull the plug on all remaining support," he says.
>   The Bush administration, along with its British allies, is not alone is
resisting the term "civil war." UN Secretary General Kofi Annan warned on
Monday that Iraq was "almost there." But as UN chief, he too faces political
considerations in his use of terminology. And at this delicate moment, with
the US-led coalition and Middle East nations considering next steps, Mr.
Annan is walking a careful line.........
>
>
>
>   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
>
>     "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness...."
>
>   ~ The Declaration of Independence - July 4th, 1776
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

Reply via email to