Baker column: Why reduce war to a euphemism?

Our president is so use to walking on egg-shells while trying to get help from congress on ‘everything good for the people,’

that he cannot even use a noun while asking for help in a war against our enemy!


By trying to choose a middle ground between Democrats and Republicans, the president apparently is not getting support from either side and, according to Politico, his proposal might not even be voted on in committee.

It does not matter what he tries to do for the country, the country is fighting him tooth and nail because the vast majority of our public did not like what our past president did to the country, myself included!

AUMF – “authorization for the use of military force” in our fight against ISIL.

Is the use of the word “war” so terrifying to the public or so politically fraught that the unleashing of U.S. military power is reduced to a euphemism? Are those killed or maimed in carrying out an AUMF somehow lesser victims than those who fought in a war? And were our past leaders being more honest with us when they voted 11 times from 1812 through 1942 to declare war on foreign enemies?


A mild, indirect, or vague term for one that is considered harsh, blunt, or offensive:

Like in

“Vietnam Conflict?”

Thousands of my brothers were dying, maimed douched in a chemical (Agent Orange) and the government flat-out refused to call a “WAR” a “WAR”

Maimed- To injure, disable, or disfigure, usually by depriving of the use of a limb or other part of the body.

Mind you my followers!

It turned out that a past president with the help of his (Ventriloquist), used lies and trickery to get us into two wars?