You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Iraq
Rumsfeld Bans The Word 'insurgents'
2005-11-30
Washington, 30 Nov. (AKI) - The US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld has banned the use of the word 'insurgents' when referring to the militants operating in Iraq. "Over the weekend I thought to myself. 'You know, that gives them a greater legitimacy than they seem to merit," he told journalists during a Pentagon briefing on Tuesday. "It was an epiphany," he said, throwing his hands in the air.
We know. We've been changing 'insurgent' to 'terrorist' on the 'Burg for many months now.
Rumsfeld encouraged those at the briefing to consult their dictionaries for the definition of 'insurgent', which, according to one Oxford dictionary means "a rebel", while insurrection is defined as "rising against established authority". "These people aren't trying to promote something other than disorder, and to take over that country and turn it into a caliphate and then spread it around the world. This is a group of people who don't merit the word 'insurgency', I think," Rumsfeld said.

However, the ban proved a problem for the recently-appointed Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Peter Pace, who ran into trouble as the briefing continued, stumbling and pausing as he struggled to come up with a new word to describe the Iraqi insurgents. "I have to use the word 'insurgent' because I can't think of a better word right now," he admitted to Rumsfeld, who immediately suggested "'Enemies of the legitimate Iraqi government', how's that?". But, while discussing explosive devices Pace then used the 'I' word again, prompting Rumsfeld to recoil in mock horror.

Pace also proved himself to be no 'yes' man. When questioned about torture by the Iraqi authorities, Rumsfeld said "obviously, the United States does not have a responsibility." Pace, however, evidently disagreed, telling the briefing "It is the absolute responsibility of every US service member, if they see inhumane treatment being conducted, to intervene, to stop it."

When Rumsfeld tried to correct him, saying, "I don't think you mean they have an obligation to physically stop it; it's to report it," Pace stood his ground. "If they are physically present when inhumane treatment is taking place, sir, they have an obligation to try to stop it," the Joint Chiefs Chairman stated.
Good. Pace is right. Torture is wrong.
Commenting on the briefing, Washington Post opinionist Dana Milbank wrote that despite leading the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 as defence secretary, Rumsfeld came across at times as someone simply observing the Iraq war on television. He deflected one question about the use of white phospherous on the battlefield onto General Pace, and asked how widespread the abuse in Iraq was, he answered: "I am not going to be judging it from 4,000 miles away."

Asked about "uniformed death squads" in Iraq, after the brother of a prominant Sunni leader murdered along with his sons last week said the killers had Iraqi army uniforms and vehicles, Rumsfeld first tried to avoid answering, saying "I'm not going to comment on hypothetical questions." On the journalist pointing out that it was not hypothetical the defence secretary then suggested that the death-squad allegations could be politically motivated, before saying, "I just don't know. I can only talk about what I know." And with an exaggerated shrug of the shoulders he rounded off his answer with, "That's life".
Posted by:Steve

#7  Since they all have beards, just call them "barbarians"
Posted by: Flerert Whese8274   2005-11-30 23:25  

#6  However, I prefer to drop all these terms for the preferred "target" or "lead magnet", whichever.

Heh, heh, heh, heh, I like these too.
Posted by: John Q. Citizen   2005-11-30 15:30  

#5  How about "barbarian hordes", sounds kind of good

US forces pushed back another wave of barbarian hordes in the city of ...
Posted by: Unoluter Phinemble3179   2005-11-30 15:14  

#4  Semantics, semantics....they don't give a shit what we call them and the Sunnis are largely insurgents, not terrorists. Their tactics are teroristic, but those fuckers are indiginous, so officially they're insurgents.

Al Q, they are terrorists, mercenaries even.Jihadist may be the official terminology we should use to be most accurate.

However, I prefer to drop all these terms for the preferred "target" or "lead magnet", whichever.

And I just can't abide by "homicide bomber", sorry ladies it's just stupid. No shit they're killing people with their bombs that ain't the unique identifier, the unique identifier of a suicide bomber is that they are willing to kill themselves to kill others.

However, I'd also much prefer to replace both suicide and homicide bomber with the burg preferred, "splodeydope". It has such a ring to it.

But again, semantics, let just call them all dead.

EP
Posted by: ElvisHasLeftTheBuilding   2005-11-30 11:50  

#3  It's f&*%^$#&! about time! And change suicide-bomber to homicidal-suicide boomer!
Posted by: The Happy Fliegerabwehrkanonen   2005-11-30 11:26  

#2  Dana Milbank (Jouranalist - DNC)
Posted by: Frank G   2005-11-30 11:20  

#1  He deflected one question about the use of white phospherous on the battlefield onto General Pace

The press is trying real, real hard to make that story fly.
Posted by: Robert Crawford   2005-11-30 10:35  

00:00