By the way, I know I have written this before, but I think the use of the term “insurgents” by the media inaccurate and propagandistic in its essence. As far as I know… and correct me if I’m wrong… there has not been one single of these people being anything but fascists, either of the Baathist or Islamist variety. Calling them “insurgents” then cloaks them in the romantic veneer of “freedom fighters.” We shall see whether the media continues with this obfuscation after the handover. (If there were neo-Nazis attacking the governments of Europe, would they call them “insurgents”? I think not.)
Indeed.
A fascist is “reactionary or dictatorial person,” according to yourdictionary.com, kinda like, oh, George W. Bush.
They define fascism as “A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.”
Given the state of the situation in Iraq, I’d say “partisan” is still most accurate.
The term “fascist” describes the Saddam government in Iraq, and the Taliban government in Afghanistan. The USA, for its flaws, is not a fascist state.
You can look it up.