# "Bush at War" -- Media servility at its finest. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 23, 2002, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-at-war-media-servility-at-its-finest/138310 "2002-11-23T04:40:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2002, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-at-war-media-servility-at-its-finest/138310/21 "2002-11-25T16:53:24Z")
> [@](#): > > **For example, what the hell does this mean? “Listen, I am a product of the Vietnam world. There is a very fine line between micromanaging combat and setting the tactics” on one hand, and “to kind of make sure there is a sense of, not urgency, but sense of purpose and forward movement.” Apparently it means something to Woodward, since he does not press Bush on these empty statements. Vietnam world?** What part of this quote are you having trouble with? It seems to me an obvious point about how civilian leaders need to stay in control of the military and political objectives and at the same time leave the tactics to achieve those objectives to the professionals. This point was best illustrated in the Johnson administration’s disastrous handling of the war in Vietnam. Since we are quoting Orwell “Pacifism is objectively pro-fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side, you automatically help out that of the other. Nor is there any real way of remaining outside such a war as the present one. In practice, ‘he that is not with me is against me’ - George Orwell” ---
**Author:** ![El\_Kabong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_kabong/32/496_2.png) [@El\_Kabong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Kabong)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2002, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-at-war-media-servility-at-its-finest/138310/22 "2002-11-25T17:46:35Z")
> [@](#): > > And please, El\_Kabong, let’s keep this civil. If you are going to call me a liar, I will reserve the right to fight back. Just so you are forewarned. Your threat, if that’s what it is, means nothing to me. I already said I was out of this thread, and I meant it. You would serve your case better by addressing the lack of evidence for your assertions, not by threatening your critics. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2002, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-at-war-media-servility-at-its-finest/138310/23 "2002-11-25T18:57:47Z")
Nothing of substance to add, except to snicker condescendingly that this: > [@](#): > > I think the point made in the OP is that the press should to point out that Bush’s statements are mostly nonsensical beyond the fact that Bush wishes to convey belligerence against the enemy to the people his is leading…What is the press responsibility to presenting their reports… was followed by complaints that _Bush_ was “butchering the syntax”. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2002, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-at-war-media-servility-at-its-finest/138310/24 "2002-11-25T23:02:31Z")
Thanks to **Lemur866** for noting the correct context of the Bush quote **Chumpsky** was all lathered about in the OP. It makes quite a difference - unless of course, you’re most interested in waving little snippets of dialogue as confirmation of your predjudices. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-at-war-media-servility-at-its-finest/138310.md?page=1)