Thursday, October 05, 2006
Terrorists?
Maybe I'm a little slow but I just noticed some curious wording in U.S. military press releases like this one:
So U.S. soldiers and some Iraqis got in a shoot out and four Americans were killed. Ok, they weren't just any Iraqis, they were insurgents, right? Not really, according to the U.S. military. They called them "terrorists".
Huh?!?! I thought terrorism was attacking civilian targets. Yet these Iraqis who got into a good old "mano a mano" fight with U.S. troops are terrorists? Killing enemy soldiers is now considered terrorism?
If that is the case all I can say if the B.S. propoganda of the U.S. military is rendering yet another word completely meaningless.
|
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASERELEASE No. 20061004-03Oct. 4, 2006 Four Soldiers killed by indirect, small-arms fireMulti-National Corps – Iraq PAO BAGHDAD – Four Multi-National Division – Baghdad Soldiers died at approximately 9 a.m. Oct. 4 when terrorists attacked their patrol with indirect and small-arms fire northwest of Baghdad.
The names of the Soldiers are being withheld pending notification of next of kin.
So U.S. soldiers and some Iraqis got in a shoot out and four Americans were killed. Ok, they weren't just any Iraqis, they were insurgents, right? Not really, according to the U.S. military. They called them "terrorists".
Huh?!?! I thought terrorism was attacking civilian targets. Yet these Iraqis who got into a good old "mano a mano" fight with U.S. troops are terrorists? Killing enemy soldiers is now considered terrorism?
If that is the case all I can say if the B.S. propoganda of the U.S. military is rendering yet another word completely meaningless.
|
