Major Terrorist Threat in UK-US discovered

[NirvanaMan]

Can we actually blame the media for Iraq?

Clearly not...and no one suggested that. Certainly not I. What you can blame them for is the sensationalization of it all and the misrepresentation of reality.

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

You know what I'm seeing more and more often? Bush or Rumsfeld paint some rosey picture of what's going on in Iraq, and then a couple days later, a general on the ground there sweating under the collar.....

Ok so I know this is an overwhelmingly liberally-biased message board, so anything that is said that could possibly be deemed as supportive of what is seen as an evil republican regime will be struck down with furious anger, but I'll play for a post or two anyway.

Even if the administration is trying to paint a rosey picture over there, and I can't say that I have exactly seen that, the American people would never know about it because the media would not allow that slant. It didn't sell newspapers during Vietnam...and it still doesn't now. I'm sure the administration is trying to spin their successes and minimize their failures. Duh. And that PR BS game should be ignored. The issue I raised is that the media decided for the American people that this is a quagmire and a failure before it even began...and that is how it has been spun. A soliders or regiments succeses are never shown on TV today. Schools that are built, hospitals that are opened, ie...positive news...is never broadcasted. Again, this is not to say that this operation is a failure or a success, but if the tide was shifting, the media certainly would never let us know.

Support our troops. Bring them home!

Unfortunately, that sort of mentality is rather silly, overly simplistic, and untimately short-sighted. I don't think I need to get into the reasons as to why. Wether or not you agree with the actions taken, and 99% of those on this board disagree...you can't just abandon those people.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by NirvanaMan

Ok so I know this is an overwhelmingly liberally-biased message board, so anything that is said that could possibly be deemed as supportive of what is seen as an evil republican regime will be struck down with furious anger, but I'll play for a post or two anyway.

Even if the administration is trying to paint a rosey picture over there, and I can't say that I have exactly seen that, the American people would never know about it because the media would not allow that slant. It didn't sell newspapers during Vietnam...and it still doesn't now. I'm sure the administration is trying to spin their successes and minimize their failures. Duh. And that PR BS game should be ignored. The issue I raised is that the media decided for the American people that this is a quagmire and a failure before it even began...and that is how it has been spun. A soliders or regiments succeses are never shown on TV today. Schools that are built, hospitals that are opened, ie...positive news...is never broadcasted. Again, this is not to say that this operation is a failure or a success, but if the tide was shifting, the media certainly would never let us know.

NirvanaMan, I am currently unable to mojo you, but that post was certainly mojo worthy.

[BarTopDancer]

Originally Posted by NirvanaMan

Unfortunately, that sort of mentality is rather silly, overly simplistic, and untimately short-sighted. I don't think I need to get into the reasons as to why. Wether or not you agree with the actions taken, and 99% of those on this board disagree...you can't just abandon those people.

Well, sit down, because I agree with you. But we need an exit strategy and we need to get out. We aren't fixing anything, we aren't accomplishing anything other than killing and getting our own people killed. This *war* is endless. We came for the WMDs, there wern't any. We came to get Saddam out, we did that. We came to promote democracy, we're trying and failing. At some point, we need to just say ok, here is what we are going to do, and then we are going to have to leave.

We're ending up with a new generation of shell-shocked troops. In 20-30 years how many of these men and women will be the homeless vets we see on the corner, lives shattered because we jumped into something we had no way to get out of.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by NirvanaMan

Ok so I know this is an overwhelmingly liberally-biased message board, so anything that is said that could possibly be deemed as supportive of what is seen as an evil republican regime will be struck down with furious anger, but I'll play for a post or two anyway.

Wha, wha, get over yourself.

I responded to your call for "tempering" from the people who are there. Everything I've seen from the people who are there paint a far worse picture than the administration is spewing. And, more to the point, paint a picture that matches up almost blow-for-blow with what the pre-war intelligence said would happen - sectarian violence, ecalating towards full scale civil war, aided by foreing insurgency. This isn't what the Congressional detractors said, it's what Bush's military advisors predicted, and they were dead on right.

So yeah, I'm pretty okay with the media pointing that reality out, because all I can hope is that one of these days we'll learn from the fact that this make 6 for 6 over the past century or so where a US lead regime change, not instigated by local revolution, results in even bloodier civil war.

[NirvanaMan]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Wha, wha, get over yourself.

Wow! That seems uncalled for! In addition to not making sense. Get over myself? Huh? Where exactly in my post was I proclaiming my greatness? I was simply asserting what I believed to be obvious, but you are free to refute it.

That aside, it seems clear that our eyes and ears on the scene seem to have terribly different views of the same situation. Since none of us are there, I suppose it is difficult for any of us to say for sure what is going on, but I still have to believe accounts relayed to me from those on the scene that are angry with our media's lack of recognition for their successes and misportrayal of the actuality of the events. And I suppose yours would be happy with the medias portrayal and consider it to be good work. There are no successes. All is failure.

Again, we're not there, so we don't know. Oh well. So, its clearly not ok for the administration to spew their BS spin, without some sort of checks and balances. Fine. I agree. But it's ok for the media to spew their BS without any checks, so long as you happen to agree with their viewpoint? Hmmm, I can't say I agree with that philosophy.

That smiley is freakin awesome.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Originally Posted by NirvanaMan

but I still have to believe accounts relayed to me from those on the scene that are angry with our media's lack of recognition for their successes and misportrayal of the actuality of the events.

As I'm too fried right now to dig up a cite, I'll just put this out there anecdotally and you can take it for what it's worth.

I read an interesting interview with a CNN reporter who was in Baghdad, don't remember which one. He/she made the point that, many times, they are forbidden by the military to report good news. The reason given was that the military was afraid that if they reported that a particular sector was doing well, it would be targetted next. The reported stated that there is good news but that they are not allowed to report it.

I find that plausable and also think it sheds some light on the argument made by many on the right that the media is failing to report good news.

And I don't deny that there have been good things that have happened in Iraq. Sadly, I think those days are over though. I listened to military commander after military commander the other day state that a full blown civil war is a real possibility in the near future. That isn't media spin. That is what the people that are there are reporting. And right now, I trust what General Peter Pace says just a tad more than Rummy telling us that things are going great.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Motorboat Cruiser

I read an interesting interview with a CNN reporter who was in Baghdad, don't remember which one. He/she made the point that, many times, they are forbidden by the military to report good news. The reason given was that the military was afraid that if they reported that a particular sector was doing well, it would be targetted next. The reported stated that there is good news but that they are not allowed to report it.

I find that plausable and also think it sheds some light on the argument made by many on the right that the media is failing to report good news.

Interesting, and it makes sense.

Wow - that could be the first time I have ever uttered such words about a post from MBC.

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

People like to hear about trainwrecks and read about them.

Goes with my dirty laundry comment. Good news isn't interesting.

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Goes with my dirty laundry comment. Good news isn't interesting.

Totally. I mean, look at this site. Which thread got the most hits lately? The NA/Nephy love thread or Snowflake's new job thread? Uh, the NA/Nephy thread. People love to watch unrest, people fighting, etc.
Look at reality TV, people like to see controversy, people upset, people crying, people yelling. Yikes.

And getting back to the topic, I was so conflicted this morning. Romney got a lot of kudos for stepping up to the plate, going on the air and telling MA that the National Guard has been called on to protect the state. He even beat Bush to the airwaves. One one hand, I think that's great good for him. On the other hand, I'm thinking he's doing this to pimp himself as a Presidential Candidate for '08 and he's trying to get the Big Dig mess off the front page of the newspaper.

I'm skeptical about all this, too, in a way.

Cheney talked about Lieberman's loss the day before this story broke about the foiled plot. He said Lieberman's loss would encourage al-Qaeda types.

The attacks came in searing remarks from, among others, Ken Mehlman, the chairman of the Republican National Committee and Vice President Dick Cheney, who went so far as to suggest that the ouster of Mr. Lieberman might encourage “al Qaeda types.”

Source

This was the day before details of the plot were uncovered. I guarantee you he already knew about the foiled plot and still said what he said. I think that Cheney is clearly using this event for political purposes as we near the Nov elections.

And might I add that Bush is still on vacation. Yes, he can work from his farm. But it shows his country that he is concerned about this if he actually picked up and went back to DC.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

Totally. I mean, look at this site. Which thread got the most hits lately? The NA/Nephy love thread or Snowflake's new job thread?

Well, part of that on this board is that good news isn't controversial nor worthy of discussion. It is great that Snowflake got a new job, but how much discussion is going to happen about it?

Snowflake: I got a new job
GC: Congrats!
SCA: What? Why the hell did you need a new job? What was wrong with the old one? Were you too lazy to do it right?
MBC: Why are you calling her lazy?
Snowflake: Sob! I'm not lazy
Alex: The exact definition of lazy may not perhaps be applicable here
SzczM: Did you quit because you are gay and there was discrimination?
Snowflake: SOB!

Ummm....no. Congrats to Snowflake, certainly (spoken as someone who is three days away from a new job himself), but once the congratulations are issued, there's just not that much more to say.

[lashbear]

Originally Posted by NirvanaMan

That smiley is freakin awesome.

I just realised you can combine it with heads too !





...sory, I'm a bit slow...