Use of Language to Gain Support for the War in Iraq

Is language being used as a tool of politics today? Is the deliberate and precise word choice of politicians used to persuade United States citizens? Specifically, is it possible that the Bush administration is using language to gain support for the war in Iraq?

The most influential and powerful politician in the United States is our president, George W. Bush. He stands as the leader of this great nation, elected by a majority of its citizens. His re-election attests to the confidence that many US citizens have for this man. Because of this, many US citizens find their president as a credible and believable source, if not the epitome of such. If citizens find our president to be a credible source, then Bush has the power to create a reality based on statements he makes.

Bush gave a nationally publicized address to US citizens on the war in Iraq at Fort Bragg, North Carolina on June 28 of this year. Bush stated, “The troops here and across the world are fighting a global war on terror,” speaking of the American troops stationed in Iraq. Bush made the distinction that Americans fighting in Iraq are fighting in the global war on terror. People then believed him because they saw their president as credible. The reality became his statement—a war on terror had begun.

Bush made his intentions for invading Iraq very clear in another national address he gave at a National Endowment for Democracy event on October 6 of this year. He stated in Washington, “We will confront this mortal danger to all humanity. We will not tire or rest until the war on terror is won.” He has turned the focus away from the nation of Iraq and focuses on terrorism in general. Making this connection between terrorism and Iraq, Bush attempts to showcase to citizens how Iraq is the central force of terrorism in the world. Because many Americans may not follow daily newscasts, CNN updates and newspaper articles, the only news they hear—or the most credible-- on Iraq is from Bush, because they see him as the source who knows the most information.

Bush implies that if citizens protest the war, they protest the fight of world terrorism. This could drive people to support a global war on terrorism even if they were against the reasons for beginning a war in Iraq. Citizens want to trust their government, specifically their president. If a citizen cannot trust his president--the person with the highest amount of power in his nation—then he cannot trust his nation. This is a scary notion that many people do not want to entertain, let alone accept.

John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton are media critics who wrote a book called, “Trust Us, We’re Experts! How Industry Manipulates Science And Gambles With Your Future,” in which they investigate methods that industry uses to influence public opinion. In this book, they state that, “Politics is more art than science.” Maybe this is why people cannot stop gawking at the war in Iraq, like art—or a bad car crash.