Apparently, nobody can figure out whether Iraq is in a civil war or not. Donald Rumsfeld (who can’t possibly be relied upon for unbiased opinion on this) evidently feels that the situation in Iraq has not yet devolved to that point.
The terrorists are determined to stoke sectarian tension and are attempting to spark a civil war. But despite the many acts of violence and provocation, the vast majority of Iraqis have shown that they want their country to remain whole and free of ethnic conflict.
Yet Iraq’s former Prime Minister says his country is already engaged in a civil war. Of course, Polimom doesn’t believe his opinion can be considered unbiased, either. He does, however, bring the right issue out:
“It is unfortunate that we are in civil war. We are losing each day as an average 50 to 60 people throughout the country, if not more,” Allawi told the BBC. “If this is not civil war, then God knows what civil war is.”
That really is the question, don’t you think? How does one define “civil war”? Wikipedia says, “In simple terms, a Civil War is a war in which a country fights another part of itself.”
That seems simple enough, doesn’t it?
Perhaps it’s a question of numbers. Is there some mysterious threshold of deaths that must be crossed, before one can say, definitively, that Iraq is in the throes of civil war?
Polimom thinks that the continued quibbling about whether Iraq’s civil war is looming, or already upon them, is similar to saying a woman is almost pregnant. Either one is, or is not.
It’s time we went ahead and called the situation in Iraq what it is: Civil War. Now let’s get on to dealing with it… before we waste more time playing with semantics.