[stubai]

DMZ,

You are sadly wrong on the use of the word INSURGENT. The people we fight in Iraq have zero political vision for the future of Iraq. 90% of the violence is tribal warfare fought by blood lusting fascist nihilists left over from the Saddam Regime. The other 10% is Terrorist Violence perpetrated by sociopath, Islamic Fundamentalist, Nihilists who give Stalin and Hitler a run for their money in terms of pure evil. Jihad is martyrdom for salvation or in other words Death for the sake of Death without end. Neither one of these groups fits into the definition of Insurgent. Neither group seeks to create a new order in Iraq along their particular political agenda. Don't buy into this caliphate crap-ola its propaganda designed to win over recruits for martyrdom. As for the Fascists remnants of the Saddam Years they only want to kill their enemies, which is most of the world. After that they don't have much of a platform either. Neither group has grass roots support indeed according to the most recent polling 92.8% of all Iraqis reject VIOLENCE yet your so called "insurgents" live only for violence.

[dmz]

My Websters defines the term insurgent as one "rising in rebellion against the prevailing government". No motivations for those rising against the government are ascribed, so be they nihilists, or radical Islamic terrorists, it is inconsequential.

Given that the terrorists are, in fact, "rising in rebellion against the prevailing government", I am forced to conclude that my defense of the use of the term insurgent is 100% accurate.

Liberals like to redefine terms to suit their political ends, we should not mimic them. Words are what they mean, and the terrorists fighting us in Iraq are accurately called insurgents. Again, note that while terrorist and insurgent may not be synonyms, one can accurately use either term.