Collateral damage, air strikes, cluster bombs, humanitarian intervention - what are we talking about here? Unfortunately, killing men, women and children. Language which disguises the awful reality of war is often standard practice. Manipulation of language is also used to demonise the enemy and create a "just cause" for war. Interestingly, in this conflict, both sides have described the enemy as Hitler. (After the Chinese embassy bombing, the latest banners in Beijing brand Bill Clinton with a swastika.)

As the epitome of evil this century, the name Hitler is invoked a regular basis, from Saddam Hussein to Fidel Castro. It conjures up extraordinarily cruel images. We almost feel righteous about violent attacks on such an enemy, regardless of "collateral damage" - i.e., dead and maimed civilians. The Serbs use the same tactic, comparing NATO to the Nazis, but with a particular edge: the Nazi invasion of Yugoslavia in 1941 began with a bombardment of Belgrade, not unlike the NATO mission. However, Hitler was Hitler, and once again this sort of simplification really only leads to misunderstanding Then again, there are times when simplicity is devastatingly clear. Irish Times journalist Lara Marlowe wrote recently: "There is only one word to describe NATO's war in Yugoslavia: a catastrophe."

Trocaire has produced an education resource, War in Europe: Lessons from Kosovo. (Trocaire, 169 Booterstown Avenue, Blackrock, Co Dublin, tel: (01) 288 5385).

next week: Star Wars Episode I opens in the US - possibly the biggest film - and surely the biggest hype - of our time