Is That Legal?

Jingoistic politics. Political graffiti. A literal slur tattooed on the graves of those who sacrificed everything.

It is traditional to name the wars in which a soldier fought.

My step-father's headstone, in Arlington, reads

WW2
Korea
Vietnam

I suppose, should I take a military grave, I will get OIF, which would bother me less than GWOT, or worse yet, GSAVE.

TK

But shouldn't it just say "Iraq" or "Afghanistan," rather than "OIF?"

As a veteran of multiple foreign wars spanning the last three decades, I can tell you that I would not want to have the political name of the operation attached to my gravestone.

The country name, on the other hand, possesses an apolitical dimension.

It really comes down to whether you want to be remembered for the war politics of the time, or for your personal ultimate sacrifice.

There's also a tradition of honor among soldiers, a certain respect for the profession that is devoid of all politics. It is partly what the tomb of the unknown soldier symbolizes. It is the reason why soldiers feel respect for enemy soldiers (but not terrorists) of the past.

Few non-veterans truly understand the honor of serving your country on the battlefield, of putting yourself in harm's way in defense of an abstraction.

I'm not using the word glory, of course, because, like Owen, we all know that "Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori" is the old spent lie.

Most soldiers don't don their uniforms and battle gear thinking, "Gee, won't it be great to fight and die today for Bush and the Republican Party, and the conservative viewpoints they represent." Despite what the media holds out, soldiers hate war. It's dangerous stuff, going to war, and the experiences are nasty and the food and accomodations austere. And we don't always believe in the reasons for going to war. But we have a profound respect for the authority of the democratically elected representatives of our country, even if our personal views clash.

As soldiers we have a stake in the political process borne of its possibly lethal consequences to us, and we are servants to the voters of this country. Yet, for most soldiers, political debate ends on the plane trip out of this country. And honor begins.

Nice use of the black badge as a background.

From the beginning the "war" on terrorism has been conducted much more like the "war" on drugs than a real war. The Army's "attacks" in Iraq look more like drug busts than military actions, and of course our government's first step after 911 was to promise indictments and that the "crimminals" would be brought to justice.

As you would probably agree, the American has more of a police mentality (chase, capture, incarcerate) than it did in Custer's time.

Oh, that's just a harmless little prank, like a fraternity prank. You know, like shaving the Alpha Delt logo in someone's head.

"But shouldn't it say 'Iraq' or 'Afghanistan' rather than 'OIF'?"

Then why wouldn't it say France or Italy or Germany instead of "WWII"? I think it is the name of the overall campaign, no? What did they use for, say, Somalia or Panama?

A.S., that misses the point, which can be summarized thusly: this war is controversial, so can't be named. That's the subtle distinction. Not a principled one, since all wars have opponents, but it is the only operative distinction.

What precisely is Orwellian about this practice? Is it the name given the military operation? If so, what's Orwellian about "Operation Iraqi Freedom"? Unless one believes that the Iraq campaign was intended to create a permanent U.S. protectorate, it was undeniably intended, at least in part, to create Iraqi freedom. (Arguing that the operation was badly planned by civilian administrators doesn't change this; no military operation in history has been named "Operation F___ Up Royally.") If the problem doesn't lie in the names themselves, is there any government-sponsored propaganda that would not be Orwellian (except, possibly, government propaganda shilling for programs the speaker supports)? If not, does the word "Orwellian" really serve any purpose at all?

(I stress that I am not defending the Iraq war, nor the practice of labeling fallen soldiers' graves with anything not chosen by the soldiers themselves, nor even the practice of government propaganda generally. I just miss the days when words meant particular things.)