We can profess over and over again that our purpose is to liberate the people of Iraq, but the symbolism, the actions of our government, absolutely must be consistent with that message. As of now, I don't believe that they are.

Here is a brief article explaining part of why I think symbolism is going to be such a vital component in this war.

Raising a US flag over an Iraqi city or town is sending a message that disturbs many people who live in the region. It is certainly not winning any of them over to our side. Al Jazeera, and other networks in the area broadcast these images over and over again. The people are bombarded with the message that America has taken an Iraqi town. Except when they see it, they see their sovereign country being taken over by foreigners. We need to demonstrate that it is the Iraqi people who are getting their country back, not a foreign force invading and taking it over.

In another instance of poor imagery, here, it seems a captured Iraqi airfield is now affectionately known as 'Bush International Airport'. Yes, to us, it might be considered benign, but to someone living there, it again appears as though the foreigners are taking over.

We need to send a direct, and unmistakable message to the people of Iraq, and the people of the region, that we are there FOR the benefit of the Iraqi people. I'm not talking about leaflets, either. I'm talking about real gestures, real symbols that show the people why we're there, and why they should support us in our endeavor to rid the world of Saddam Hussein.

If we fail to show the people of Iraq that we are there for their benefit before the dictator falls, we are going to find ourselves in a great deal of trouble in post-war Iraq. We will be trying to maintain law and order in a country with a populus decidedly hostile toward our occupying forces. This will definitely make the situation more dangerous for our soldiers. Beyond that, it will cause greater popular resistance toward ANY government sponsored by the US, regardless of how fair and just it is.

Question for debate... Do you agree that our government and military need to do a better job portraying themselves in Iraq as a liberating force? If yes, why? If no, why?

I agree with the symbolism portion, but its a difficult scenario.

Raising the flag after a victory improves morale. It shows your troops that you have won.

Raising the Iraqi flag (which symbolizes Saddam Hussein at this point) would be counter-productive to US troop morale, and would probably raise the resisting Iraqi's morale.

The airstrip sign is in bad taste. Some grunt probably put it up, and the commanders don't see an immediate problem with it, so it has remained. The sign tends to show the conflict as a personal vendetta by the President, a portrayal that should be avoided at all costs.

To be honest, I think the humanitarian aid we will be giving out soon (food, water, medecine) will have a much greater impact on the Iraqi civilians than anything else. These people know that Saddam is the bad guy. They have brutalized by him long enough.

What they don't know, is whether or not the US is the good guy. I think the humanitarian aid and post-war efforts will go much further to help the American image. They should avoid, however, any hints that we are re-naming their cities or facilities.

I don't believe for one moment that this war is to liberate the Iraqi people. Apparently, nor do a lot of other people. It is a wink wink, yeah, you know type of thing.

I think we have a very limited ability to put ourselves into the places of others. It seems to be a common characteristic among the right-leaning US citizens. Lefties tend toward compassion and seeing the other side, so my perception goes.

So, how would we feel if, say, France decided to invade, take out Bush, and put up their military as leadership while we readdress our political structures? What if France amassed 200,000 troops/support in Canada and used Mexican air routes/bases? Then wave the French flag over captured towns?

This is just one of many blunders being made in this war. Yes, we will win the battles. The results will be different than invisioned, however.

Bad symbolism combined with bull-headed insistance on controlling the whole enchilada (refusing UN leadership for rebuilding for example) will bring us ever greater headaches in the ME. Meanwhile, the US press may be tightly controlled, but other press organizations exist--and the Web.

Huh. Guess this thing wasn't well thought out.

It is traditionally done, when two nations (in this case the collation and Iraq) are at war, the one nation who takes control of a town, city, and or area raises its flag noting it is now in their control. If you look back on the Afghanistan war with the Taliban we raised our flag in many of the smaller towns and villages. Once the Afghanistan government was established our flags (the coalition) went down and the new Afghanistan flag went up. I don’t see what the problem is as far as this type of “symbolism”. People are acting as if this is a new thing when it has been done all through out the history of war and civilization.

As far as a sign put up by a solider after taking control of an airstrip and blaming it on the US government or our allies is funny to say the least.

And make no mistake; we (the coalition) are there to take control of the country until a new Iraqi government (not dictatorship) is in place and running. It would be unwise of us (referring to past experiences when we did not do so) to blaze in, take a leader out, and then leave letting the people behind to fend for themselves. It is just common sense to establish a self governing government before we release control so we do not repeat history (Which we should have learned by now but unfortunately haven’t)

The symbolism that the rest of the world is seeing is by far what is effecting or spurring people on. The ones who do not want us in there in the first place are not going to change their view point based on the fact that we do not raise our flag after taking control of an area or put up a playful (you may use a different word, but I do not think the soldier(s) who put it up is trying to tell the world this is now a US owned airfield) sign on an airfield we now control for the time being. They will just look or find something else to point to and say "See, they are here to colonize us!"

I certainly don't fault the soldiers or their immediate commanders for either incident. Throughout the history of warfare the raising of the flag over captured territory has been not only a tradition but great for morale of the soldiers. I don't want to digress on the importance (perceived or real) of the US flag here, but the actions of the marine was almost reflexive in a way. He thought he was doing his duty, to inspire his fellow marines. Lets not forget that the image of the US flag may STILL symbolize a gateway to freedom and liberation to many people.

Pseudo-ditto about Bush International Airport. We have a habit of naming places we occupy, even for short periods of time. Camp New Jersey, Fort Apache, etc... Not only is it easier to give a name to a place that is easy to remember and invokes images of home, but many names of camps and outposts throughout conflicts have been a matter of tradition. Obviously this airstrip was christened with more of a sense of humor than tradition.

Just curious, I am an avid news hound (from all sources), but I haven't heard of mush outcry from Kurds, Iraqi's or American soldiers and marines. So other than our 'friend's' at Al-Jazeera, is there anyone objecting?

Slowtime9,

I understand your position and agree that the symbolism itself isn't sufficient to swing Iraqi sentiment against the US. However, the symbolism along with the unilateral stance of the US for controlling Iraq after the war could very well swing undecided Iraqi citizens against us.

Try putting yourself in their places. You have no water, no electricity, and people are dying around you. You are losing relatives and loved ones.

Nobody can come out of this kind of situation with a rational mind. Hatred will be fuming, and that hatred will be directed somewhere. The most obvious target is the US. The word coalition may make us feel better, but the word will have no meaning for Iraqis.

War brings hatred, and hatred is not sanity. A small symbol could prompt violent action.

If raising an American flag makes our troops feel better, then please raise 50 of them in front of every captured tent, camel and burned out truck in Iraq.

We are going to clean Saddam and his thugs out of Baghdad, if the Iraqi people want to work with us after that goal is achieved, great. If they want to get hung up on whining about symbolic garbage that doesn't have a thing to do with getting people fed, clothed and their country back on its feet, we'll move on to cleaning up the rest of the world and they can rebuild the place with friends of their choice.

I can not put myself in their shoes and imagine what it may be like. I live in a country where if I spout dissent against my current government I do not have to fear that a military unit will show up at my door, rape, beat, and kill my wife and my daughter. I live in a country that does not have its government building huge palaces with money that is supposed to be spent on food, medical supplies and such. I live in a country where if I say something against my government I do not have to fear for my life.

I also can not honestly put myself in their shoes because I am admitantly biased. I see the trucks full of water, food, and medical supplies that have the US (or any other nation in this coalition) flying its flag dispensing said items. I also can not put myself in their shoes knowing that I (being an American and raised as such) would not be so easily coerced into standing in front of my military creating a “shield” for them while their cowardice hides behind me taking pot-shots at my liberators. I am sorry, but I can not.

Call me closed minded, call me not willing to understand, I call myself honest.

I don't know the current situation in Kuwait, but I know that for years and years, American forces there were not allowed to have any open celebration of Christmas, or wear christian jewelry (such as a crucifix). No alcohol or magazines that could be construed as sexually explicit (by the strict standards there) were permitted in military barracks. Packages to military family members were examined and "contraband" items were removed.
This was a country we truly liberated in every sense of the word. I think we bend over backwards to appease the Middle East. We simply represent everything the radical Islamic fundamentalists consider to be evil. It is irrelevant to them whether we raise our flag or theirs.

While I do understand the possibility that the flag and airport incidents might lead some to say 'whoa', I gotta tell you one thing.

When I first saw the film clip of the British tank knocking down the Saddam billboard and rolling over it, tread after beautiful tread, I came right out of my chair and said, 'yes!'.

Now that was a wee bit o' symbolism I hope was clear to the whole wide world!