The obsessive semantic argument over what the United States and certain U.N. allies are "doing" in Libya really needs to stop. "War," "limited military operations," "freedom fighting," "paying off the defense industry," whatever. "We are shooting targets in Libya with missiles," is what the White House should say if it doesn't want to say anything. It's phrases like these, though, that just keep the confusion alive:

"I think what we are doing is enforcing a resolution that has a very clear set of goals, which is protecting the Libyan people, averting a humanitarian crisis, and setting up a no-fly zone," [Deputy National Security Adviser Ben] Rhodes said. "Obviously that involves kinetic military action, particularly on the front end. But again, the nature of our commitment is that we are not getting into an open-ended war, a land invasion in Libya."

"Kinetic military action" means shooting at things and/or people, which is commonly what people think of as "war." Non-kinetic military action would be like cyberwarfare, or something less death-and-bomb-y.

So if the admnistration is annoyed with media figures running around calling this a "war," it should probably explain what the mission is better than something that "involves kinetic military action, particularly on the front end." Now the Internet is just making fun of the White House while we're all still waiting for a long-term plan.

[Image of two MV-22 Ospreys via AP]