G e n e r a t i o n K i l l

Evan Wright, a reporter at the ‘Rolling Stone Magazine’, is the writer of the article. In the article we follow a marine platoon during the first period of the Iraqi invasion, we follow them through first enemy contact and hear their own private thoughts, about why they think they’re here, and why they’ve chosen to come here.

The article is part reflection and part reenactment of events. The article is very informally written and is merely based of why he thinks these soldiers went to war, and the forces behind their decision making. “(…)the grace of Camelot to the shame of Watergate(…)Big Lie is as central to American governance as taxation.” His writing has a negative tone each time he speaks of the American government. He’s consequently steering the text in a direction that make the soldier seem as ‘just another brick in the wall’. The article is not objective as it should be, to allow readers to form their own opinions on the subject, but instead is filled with lingual arguments that shape writers opinion on the matter; “(…)first generation of disposable children” “They see the invasion of Iraq as simply another campaign in a war without end(…)an acceleration of the trend started in the 1990’s with Somalia, Haiti, Kosovo: America(…) the world’s dirty harry” “white house blow job” “few would be shaken to discover that they might actually be leading a grab for oil”

“It’s another Iraqi town, nameless to the marines racing down the main drag in Humvees, bowing it to pieces” By introducing us to a some what controversial example immediately, the writer of the article positions us to, already at this point, take a controversial stance. It’s not just an Iraqi town, it’s “another” Iraqi town. Already at this point the writer have taken a clear stance in terms of his attitude toward the Iraqi war. By using a some what stereotypical