JUST HOW FUCKING STUPID DO YOU HAVE TO BE TO BELIEVE IN DONALD FUCKING TRUMP?!?"!?!

The point is that they don’t support the Iran invasion.

It’s an air attack

NO.

I only make mention of using correct terms when describing whats going on.

"US Invasion causes deaths of school children" is not factually correct
"US Air attack causes deaths of school Children" IS factually correct.


Do not let anger cause us to lose our ability to accurately communicate.

the difference between invading their airspace in an air attack and invasion.

In your response post you further clarified that it's an" invasion of airspace".

This can be even further clarified. Because an "invasion of airspace" does not in and of itself always equate to an air attack. But an air attack, by it's very nature, equates to both an attack and an invasion of airspace..

Accurate language is important. Otherwise the reader will discount what is trying to be communicated.

But then again, one can always just start with 'THE CHILDREN!" and expect folks to pay appropriate attention. That approach never resonates with me - I am a less emotional and more intellectual reader - that's just me. No offence intended and none taken.

From MY PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE: The deaths of children in this instance is horrific. However, I also feel that is really important in times like these that we are crystal clear in our communications about the circumstances surrounding critical issues. Using incorrect terminology might get the writer points for trying something novel or innovative, but it does not help accurately convey the facts about a situation.

This is only my personal opinion regarding style of communications - IT IS NOT A JUDGEMENT ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING THE DEATHS OF IRANIAN SCHOOL CHILDREN.

us which dictionary you are using. Duly noted.

???

The Saudis and Likudniks in taking down their "existential enemy", the Shia Iranians and their proxies.
Maybe we're even assisting Russia by damaging an oil supplier competitor.
We aren't invading, as we aren't putting boots on the ground or taking territory.

The US is still complicate in that this particular military action is a destabilizing attack rather than an actual invasion.
Now, if the Saudis want to go in and split Iran up amongst royal family members or tribal/corporate allies to rule, then it would be an invasion.

Perhaps we should now let language and meaning completely off the hook?

Do we talk about a gunman's bullets "invading" a victims body?

When the media does that, we call them out.

one is using.

Invading air space is not a new expression or concept. Invasion of a nation's air space by bombers is generally cause for concern. In the US, invasion of our air space by enemy bombers would cause our defense fighters to scramble and the nation to go on full alert. Start dropping bombs after invading the air space, and you've got yourself a war.

But just saying "US Invasion" brings connotation of "Boots on the ground" - which it is not.

There once was a day when we said "We bombed" or "We invaded". and they actually meant something specific,

I guess today that doesn't really matter.

I guess accurate language and descriptions are unimportant now.

I stand corrected. Carry on.

Over and out on this subject.

the difference between connotation and denotation? You were arguing denotation at the beginning of your "argument," but now you tell us it's connotation; I quote from your post:

But just saying "US Invasion" brings connotation of "Boots on the ground" - which it is not.

You should know better than to hijack a thread over a point you don't understand, but you were corrected in several posts. I hope you learned something

Signed,

English teacher

Let’s agree that we will use denotation instead of connotation.

I’m always happy to be corrected due to an oversight. Thank you.

Somebody that you can trust told you that?

A new democratic friendly regime is expected to instantly materialize in Iran after we bomb the f-ck out of them.

That's not a strategy, it's a pipe dream.

Erik Prince is a grifter. His opinion is meaningless.

There is no such thing as Trump’s MAGA commitment. There never has been, there never will be.

There has only been commitment to grifting by using hatred. Trump continues to play these people as fools.