We're watching a desperate Syrian dictator with a big pile of chemical weapons (same as Saddam used on his people and then magically vanished)... before the Iraq war, these were referred to as wmd. These days they are just chemical weapons and I have yet to hear any of our leaders refer to them as WMD. Is the term not correct anymore or is it just less distressing to think of them as just harmful chemicals?
Maybe we'll have to wait for the carnage to call them WMD again... kinda like "workplace violence" and terrorism.
The left is angry because they are now being judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
WMD is something you say because of propaganda from a decade ago, sometimes propaganda does not stand the test of time like information. WMD's also remind us that we were all tricked into war, people don't like to be reminded of this.
Why is reality propaganda? If a weapon can kill hundreds of thousands, why can't you call it a weapon of mass destruction? Is the word terrorism now just propaganda too? Seems like we have to tiptoe around certain words and terms these days.
The left is angry because they are now being judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
