Excuse please, Mr. Artist? This damning evidence of the use of women and children as human shields? Cowering and cringing behind them as they fire upon our troops? Are you indulging yourself in a bit of rhetorical hyperbole? Or can you present facts to support this claim?
'Cause I pay pretty close attention to the news, and, you know, this nugget of horror escaped my attention. Can’t imagine how, really, since one would think such a thing would be rather prominently discussed.
But you have the facts right at your fingertips, no? Well, then, you’ll have no problem. Unless, of course, you’re pulling this out of your Nixon.
Well, let me check the files here…nope, sorry. It looks like I didn’t make a note of the names of the soldiers and/or officers commenting about it on television. I didn’t make a note of the newpaper and magazine articles that mentioned it either.
However, they did nonetheless. If memory serves, however, it was during the fighting in Basra and Nasiriah (sp?) that it was reported.
Without exception, these soldiers and officers were filled with disgust and disbelief over how any type of people could be so cowardly and so uncaring regarding their own women and children. Neither can I.
A further point, elucidator (and may I congratulate you on the irony of your own name, although I must I admit I do rather like Mr. Artist. Perhaps I’ll change my name to that. )
Any way, since it bears a symbiotic relationship to the OP, I would also point out that the news media, being against our action in Iraq (much as are most of the posters to this thread), are reluctant to report, and are given to downplay, incidents that will further inflame passions in favor of the war.
You seem to be a reasonably intelligent and decent person. Can’t you at least give me credit for forming my own opinions and making my own observations? I’ve noticed for a long time, as I’m sure **Milum **has as well, that any occurrance that can be used to support anti-war (for lack of a better term) sentiments is brandished about vigorously here, while happenings that would further inflame pro-war (again, for lack of a better term) sentiments are given short shrift or ignored altogether. This is only human nature, I suppose. The same thing goes on in the news media. However, we’re supposed to be fighting ignorance here and dealing with the world the way it really is, instead of sticking our heads in the sand and hoping that if we don’t piss off the terrorists they won’t hurt us anymore.
You don’t watch Fox News? And weren’t those stories about women and children shields, the details of which you can’t remember, in the news media? And weren’t the beheadings reported in the news media? And weren’t the stories about the rapid US victories in the formal war, and the pictures of pulling down Saddam’s statue there also? And if there had been cheering crows throwing flowers in the path of our tanks I’m sure they would have been in the news media too.
But keep on whining about the “liberal media” if it makes you feel better. Like stories about Saddam using chemical weapons in the Iran war (1980-1988 when we supported him), its another think to keep harping on.
Having said that, the things you mention don’t make up one percent of the coverage we’re exposed to. For example, how many times have you seen a reporter or civilian worker talking about the day-to-day reality of life in Iraq and how much better so many things are now, and how happy so many Iraqis are that we’re there and that their future looks so much brighter now, but virtually none of it gets reported here, and that Americans aren’t getting anywhere near an accurate picture of the good things that are happening over there?
And this is just one area in which the media slants what we hear. There are many others.
Ooooh, it’s dat ol’ debbil Liberal Media again! We aren’t getting the facts about how thrilled the Iraqi people are to be the congenial hosts to 135,000 American troops, as well as the other troops from our vast coalition, numbering about 150.
Perhaps the Iraqi people were lining the streets and tossing garlands at our troops, but we didn’t hear about it because of dat liberal media! But Starving Artist did hear about it, he has sources of news the rest of us don’t have, clear, straight from the shoulder unvarnished facts!
Perhaps we could prevail upon him to share these sources, that we too might have the advantage he has, of having our information straight from the horse’s, ah, mouth?
Because, SA, otherwise, well, you see the problem, don’t you? Without such, you run the risk of being perceived as a doctrinaire partisan, mouthing slogans and platitudes without basis in fact. One whose entire arguments amount to nothing more than ad hominem innuendos and vast claims of expertise without foundation. Can’t have that, now can we?
So come now! Share with us these sources of spin-free facts, that we might all benefit from the clarity of your thought.
I can and will. However, you chose to wander into this misplaced thread and take up a position supporting the lie that is the OP. That casts doubt on your posts in this thread.
As to your more general comment, I notice that lots of events are used by both the anti-war and pro-war posters to bolster and expound upon their views. I notice that posters on the Right and on the Left tend to leap on events that they believe will support their hot-button issues.
As I noted in one of the ever-recurring Pit fests over whether the Right or the Left suffers more abuse on this board, it depends on whose ox is being gored. I see folks on the Right complaining that no one cares about their issues (or the news that supports their views) and people on the Left complaining that no one cares about their issues (or the news that supports their views). I see enough noise from the Right and the Left to figure that most people simply read the board with their own filters set to see what they want to see (just as milum pretended that no one had spoken against the murder of Mr. Johnson despite the presence of at least four threads on the topic).
I have not seen one reporter or civilian talking about how much better things are now that the U.S. is there. The people are happy that Sadam is gone but there seems to be few improvements in the day to day lives of the ordinary folks. Maybe there will be… eventually. I have no source of information other than mainstream media. I have seen a couple of interviews from authors and diplomats on CSPAN and they have been very critical of U.S. policies. I believe Berg went there seeking opportunities promised by the U.S. propagandists. I see no evidence that the U.S. has been welcomed as liberators. Maybe the Iraqi people will warm up to American presence eventually.
I went to see Control Room last weekend. This is a documentary that follows the Al Jazeera coverage during the initial days of the war. Given your pov, I would imagine that it would be difficult for you to sit through. I found it troubling but interesting. One event… two very different spins on that event.
Regardless of one’s place on the left / right, liberal / conservative political spectrum, I think all sane folks are outraged with these beheadings. I consider myself pretty liberal and I want to be offended because of your suggestion that I am not sufficiently outraged by what happened to P. Johnson. If we were face to face, I would probably get angry and insulted by your remarks. Since this is just a message board, it is much easier to be civil. But, once again for the record, I am depressed by this kind of barbaric act. I worry about how all of this will end up. I am disturbed by the failed policies that are being pursued and I honestly think the U.S. will not find a solution no matter who is president.
Frankly, I’m surprised this thread has gone on for four pages without a moderator pulling the plug on it. There’s no debate or inquiry here, just a handful of the SDMB resident conservatives trying to get some jollies over their ideological opposition (“How dare you for not properly expressing your outrage at this atrocity!”).
As others have noted, while this might have been a middlingly-amusing Pit rant, it’s neither Great nor a Debate. But judging by the Milum’s recent trend of framing thinly-veiled partisan rants as “debates” (such as this one), I guess we shouldn’t get our hopes up.
Having said that, the things you mention don’t make up one percent of the coverage we’re exposed to. For example, how many times have you seen a reporter or civilian worker talking about the day-to-day reality of life in Iraq and how much better so many things are now, and how happy so many Iraqis are that we’re there and that their future looks so much brighter now, but virtually none of it gets reported here, and that Americans aren’t getting anywhere near an accurate picture of the good things that are happening over there?
And this is just one area in which the media slants what we hear. There are many others.
[/QUOTE]
If I wrote all day and took up most of the server memory it still would only be a small fraction of the total news extant. You do understand the concept of illustrative examples, don’t you?
The news media do carry all of GW’s speeches including those parts in which he complains that the media don’t write the good things that are happening in Iraq. If as many good things as you say really are happening the US has the manpower and resources in Iraq to take reporters and camera operators to them and get the information out. So why doesn’t GW tell the military to do that?
And a chill pill would not help as long as there are people like you who seem to think that a sledge hammer is the solution to everything. Unhappily, one of those people is the President of the US; another is Secretary of Defense; still another is the Attorney General.
I haven’t seen you “bother with” addressing any of my points thus far - merely cropping them out and nitpicking what suits you most.
I will take this opportunity to point out what I have to deal with - misguided Bushies who refuse to accept that America ever did anything to upset anyone, and are mystified by the concept of anyone disliking us. Their understanding of the world stops a few inches from their direct physical space (though it may or may not extend to their bank account). Instead of debating any points, they wander about all day making random threads on a debating forum, refuse to say what the debate is about, nitpick their opponent’s imagery, and cry when told that they aren’t debating.
Now, are you going to bother addressing anyone’s points, or merely stop just short of calling them names?
Why? The country didn’t do it; the country didn’t *allow *it to happen. It happened, like most wrongdoing, due to individual misbehavior, and in this case, the misbehavior of a very few individuals. If anything, the country stopped it.
)