Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 10 years ago

Why do War Mongrels always push semantics as their response to a valid argument?

Take Libya for example. They argue there is no war, and can easily define the term "war" as used in their little book of definitions. Then they keep arguing, and citing their little definitions, totally stone cold heart toward death and destruction.

Then one morning the events are such that it fits their definition of "war" and they naturally concur, only by that time, there is not one damn thing anybody can do about it.

If it looks like war and people are dying en masse, it smells like war and bombs are being dropped, and it feels like war, who cares what it is called?

So, Why do War Mongrels always push semantics as their response to a valid argument?

6 Answers

Relevance
  • LeAnne
    Lv 7
    10 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Consider, Obama himself has not used the word "war."

    As a veteran of the Viet Nam "conflict," I can say your dead on with the semantics argument. I suspect any other term used is simply a euphemism for war.

  • 10 years ago

    I agree with your points, except it is war monger, not mongrel.

    The only real difference between a "War" and a "Conflict" is that a "War" is declared by congress.

  • Anonymous
    10 years ago

    Yes, Mushroom clouds and mobile labs, indeed

  • Anonymous
    10 years ago

    virtnam was not a war according to johnson

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 10 years ago

    There are varying degrees to many things.

  • Anonymous
    10 years ago

    They are hypocrities.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.