Linda Zhang
Project report
MACS390, “Media, war and peace,” autumn session, 2011
Media and Cultural Studies, University of Wollongong
The project report had two components. For details of the assignment see
http://www.bmartin.cc/classes/MACS390_10outline.pdf
1. An information pack, starting on the next slide.
2. A fictional dialogue about carrying out the project, available as a separate file.
This document is located at http://www.bmartin.cc/classes/MACS390_11tops/.
Information Pack
Student Numbers:
3448873
4018710
This information pack aims to:
 Inform the general public on the Grammar of War
Discourse Theory
 Explain the relationship between language and
war through various theorists
 Apply it to events before and during the Iraq War
 Use de Bono to shift into a creative, lateral way of
thinking about grammar of war discourse
 Analyse George W. Bush’s War Ultimatum Speech
 Show how language is used to justify and sell war
 Examine using examples how subsequently the war
was reported and constructed



During War information is managed and
controlled.
Political, military, and media institutions play a role
in this process.
Aims to “nullify rather than conceal undesirable
news; control emphasis rather than facts; balance
bad news with good; and lie directly only when
certain that the lie will not be found out during the
course of the war”
- Lukin (2004) p.58

Annabelle Lukin questions how information about prosecuting
war is provided without turning people off the idea
completely? War is after all pretty ugly business.
› The answer to this question is that language is built on
systems of choice, allowing users to create alternative
representations of the same piece of ‘reality out there’.

Lt. Co. Richard Long, Former Marine Corps Public Information
Director says:
› “Our job is to win the war. Part of that is information
warfare. So we are going to dominate the information
environment”
- Lukin (2005) p.5

First Gulf War (1990)
› Report appeared in the London Daily Telegraph that Iraqi
soldiers had taken babies out of incubators and left them
on the hospital floor to die.
› This event prompted the war and gained public support.
› The story was pure fabrication by American PR firm who
were hired by the Kuwaiti
government and arranged
for a 15 year old Kuwaiti girl
to lie to a US Congressional
Committee.

Iraq War (2003)
› Saddam Hussein was reported to be a threat to world
peace because he possessed weapons of mass
destruction, WMD’s (a highly emotive spin-doctored term).
› A spurious rhetorical link was also made between Hussein
and Al-Qaeda
 - Louw p.156

Both were lies.



George W. Bush - War Ultimatum Speech
Monday 17 March 2003 from the Cross Hall in the
White House
The speech was given to prepare and inform the
United States of America on the government’s plan
to enter into war in Iraq

Eric Louw states that modern wars have seen the military
become increasingly sophisticated; skilled at using the media
as powerful tools of warfare.

Louw identifies that through use of language and grammar,
certain elements are used to media-ize and sell war:
›
›
›
›
Opposition leaderships are demonized in preparation for the war
Selective portrayal of history
Target regime destabilized and made to look unreasonable
Victims in need of saving
- Louw p.151

These elements are all present in Bush’s speech as seen in the
following quotes

The creation of identifiable villains and demonizing
opposition leaderships is usually a strong indication
that war is coming.

“The terrorist threat to America and the world will be
diminished the moment that Saddam Hussein is disarmed”

“We are a peaceful people, and we will not be intimidated
by thugs and killers”

“If Saddam Hussein attempts to cling to power, he will remain
a deadly foe until the end”
- George W. Bush (2003)

Involves presenting the target regime in a negative
light. It may also include one sided facts that justify
intervention

“The regime has a history of reckless aggression”

“In the case of Iraq, the Security Council did act in the early
1990’s”

“The United States and other nations have pursued patient
and honorable efforts to disarm the Iraqi regime without war,
pledging to reveal and destroy all its weapons of mass
destruction.”

“The world has engaged in 12 years of diplomacy… Our
good faith has not been returned”
- George W. Bush (2003)

The target regime will be destabilized, embarrassed
and made to look unreasonable and irrational
through political, economic and diplomatic
maneuvers.

“Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves
no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and
conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised”

“It has a deep hatred of America and our friends and it has
aided, trained and harbored terrorists including operative of
Al Qaeda”

“The danger is clear…with the help of Iraq, the terrorists could
fulfill their stated ambitions”
- George W. Bush (2003)
Binary opposition logic necessitates creating
‘victims’ to be saved.
 Victims are an important device for justifying using
violence against foreigners


“We will tear down the apparatus of terror and we will help
you to build a new Iraq that is prosperous and free”

“The day of liberation is near”

“Unlike Saddam Hussein, we believe
the Iraqi people are deserving and
capable of human liberty”


- George W. Bush (2003)

Repetition
› “We” - when referring to the United States and it’s allies
› “Regime” – when referring to Hussein’s government; has
negative connotations implying dictatorship and a nation state
without democracy

Choice of language
› “Disarm” – as if WMD is a fact, beyond doubt

Contrast of negative and positive language
› “Peaceful efforts to disarm the Iraqi regime have failed again
and again – because we are not dealing with peaceful men”

Tone creates a sense of fear and urgency.
› “The security of the world requires disarming Saddam Hussein
now”
› “We are acting now because the risks of inaction would be far
greater”
- George W. Bush (2003)

What is spoken to us, what we read or is represented to us
directly affects how we interpret or understand those events

“Language is a highly plastic resource: there is never just one
way to report a set of events, even when the facts may be
‘uncontested’”

“Facts never speak for themselves: they have to be brought
into existence through choices of grammar and words. This
necessarily involves us favouring one kind of view over
another.”

Evident in George W. Bush’s Ultimatum Speech
 As well as news reports during the war

- Lukin (2004) p62
Article 1
 The Guardian UK - ‘US: 'We are seeing history
unfold’
› “Three weeks after war began, jubilant crowds greeted
American troops in Baghdad yesterday, cheering as marines
toppled a giant statue of Saddam before slapping his cast
forehead with their shoes, the strongest of Arab insults.
› "Seeing the faces of liberated Iraqis, you have to say this is a very
good day," Mr Rumsfeld said at a Washington press conference.”
Article 2
 ‘Army report confirms psy ops staged toppling of
Saddam statue’
› An internal Army study of the war in Iraq has confirmed that the
infamous toppling of the statue of Saddam Hussein in Firdos
Square in central Baghdad on April 9, 2003 was stage-managed
by American troops and not a spontaneous reaction by Iraqis.
› According to the study, a Marine colonel first decided to topple
the statue, and an Army psychological operations unit turned
the event into a propaganda moment.
The Square was sealed off by the U.S.
military.
The 200 people were U.S. Marines,
international press and Iraqis.
However, the media portrayed
it as an event of the Iraqi people

Through language, war appears necessary and justified.

The public has no way to fact check and without other independent
sources of information, they consent to war.

The language techniques in Bush’s Ultimatum speech are used to
persuade and sell the war’s objectives to the public; to disarm and
remove the threat of ‘WMDs’

Consequently, in the news reporting of the Iraq war, similar
grammar techniques were used to construct reality and justify the
continuing intervention

De bono asks us to think laterally, moving away from a single
perceptual framework. Our info pack demonstrates an alternate
framework for considering the rhetoric of war and its hidden
objectives.








Bush, G.W. (2003, March 18). Full text: bush's speech. Retrieved from
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/mar/18/usa.iraq
Butt, D.G., Lukin, A., & Matthiessen, C.M. (2004). Grammar - the first covert
operation of war. Discourse & Society, 15(2-3), 58-74.
Louw, E.P. (2010). The media and political process. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Lukin, A. (2005). Information warfare: the grammar of talking war. Social
Alternatives, 24(1), 5-10.
De Bono, Edward ‘Lateral thinking and Parallel thinking.’ Accessed
05/06/2011, available at: http://www.edwdebono.com/lateral.htm
The Guardian ‘US: We are seeing History Unfold’ April 10, 2003. Accessed
05/06/2011, available at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/apr/10/iraq.iraq2
Daily Kos ‘Army Report confirms Psy Ops staged Saddam Statue Toppling’
October 07, 2004. Accessed 05/06/2011, available at:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/07/57574/-Army-Report-ConfirmsPsy-ops-Staged-Saddam-Statue-Toppling
Note: all image references are in the notes section of the corresponding slide