Stop saying: "In harms way"

[State the Obvious]

I am so sick of hearing this softened phrase used to describe the tragedy of war. Of course Republicans want to soften the concept, but why do Democrats repeat this Republican-framing phrase?

George Bush isn't merely placing our troops in "harms way"...
George Bush is sending our young American men and women to WAR...WITH TARGETS ON THEIR BACKS!

We, at the very least, owe those young people who died for a lie...more honesty and integrity than they got from their Commander-in-Chief.

We owe them.

NO MORE softened phrases to describe the TRAGEDY of war.:cry:

[Critters2]

1. I feel the same way. This phrase infuriates me. nt

[k8conant]

2. In harm's way = in danger = at war

That phrase has bothered me for years. I hear it everywhere now. Certainly it's a euphemism gone bad.

[State the Obvious]

3. I agree....

but why do Democrats help Republicans... by using those words to "soften" the atrocities of war?

After viewing Private Ryan, would you say the movie was about placing soldiers in harms way?

(I'm agreeing with you....but it just seems that the TRAGEDY of this war is overlooked.)

[MistressOverdone]

4. Interesting

because to me, it is a more descriptive phrase than 'at war.' It makes it clear that there is risk involved.

Either way, not a good concept all together.

[hijinx87]

5. indeed. it is a lame and ultimately disrespectful way

to refer to the danger that has snuffed out over 3,000 lives.