Before it slipped my mind completely I wanted to bring a very interesting post from Missing Links to your attention. In the post the blogger, Badger, comments on a televised discussion on Al-Jazeera.
The part that I found particularly interesting was this:
It is worth considering the nature of this debate, alongside the comparable “debate” in America, on whether the Iraqi situation is “civil war, yes or no”. The trick here is that if you can pin the “civil war” label on Iraq (meaning essentially “sectarian conflict”), then in Dhari’s terms, this would be seen as no longer a political struggle at all, but a religious war. America would supposedly become a non-combattant, supposedly turning into a humanitarian assistant and peacekeeper. And America’s continued involvement would thus be justified.
There’s a cruel irony here.
For many Americans proclaiming the situation in Iraq a civil war is synonymous with an obligation to withdraw from Iraq. If Missing Link’s analysis is correct, for at least some in the Middle East if the situation is a civil war, then we’re obligated to stay.