(Blitz-invasion?; 06-02; p.3)

• Characterising one's own acting as harmless

By word-creations, re-interpretations and deliberate vagueness of language one's own acts are re-defined or substituted as riskless, "business as usual" etc.
Latest examples are naming an international law breaking invasion of a sovereign state simply "regime-change" or naming pressurising politics and waging war as "pre-emptive or preventive strikes".
Considering the last example, one may as well find a re-interpretation of roles: the aggressor depicts himself as victim, which does nothing but hindering the offender in advance.
Even the deliberate vagueness can be shown with it: "pre-emption" describes a concept within the framework of deterrence that means using one's weapons immediately after an attack on them has been confirmed, "using them before losing them" in other words; "prevention" does not have such a specific meaning, the term may be denoted by anything wished for.

• Presenting "just" causes and justified alternatives

One's own warfare is characterised as just and this way justified.
Again, a concept of international law from the middle-ages is re-interpreted: in the historical context, it meant a limitation of warfare - the sovereign in the middle-ages no longer had an unconditional right to wage war but needed to prove his authority and give good reasons for this; moreover, he had to prove that war and the way it was waged were adequate in respect to its cause.
In our days however, after war has been banned by international law and military actions are only legal in case of self-defence and subject to other decisions of the United Nations' security council, this concept leads to de-limit warfare. (For a good recent account of this cf.: Schildmann, Ch: "Die Bomben aus Stahl, das Pathos aus Hollywood" [translated: Bombs made of steel, pathos made in Hollywood]. In: Frankfurter Rundschau no. 297, D2-edition, p. 14. 21. December 2002.)

The cause of war as well as the envisaged post-war alternatives are put in the centre, whereas all actions of war are not. Peaceful post-war states become prospected and in case, there are some groups fighting for their own reasons, they will be depicted as legitimate opposition and guarantors of those peaceful and legal states. (read on here)