If they had Vietnam style reporters in WWII we would have quit the war in the first month. The current stuff that we see in nothing compared to the all out Slaughter of WWI and WWII. How many troops died at Gettysburg? 50,000?? If that was live would the North have continued the Civil War? Reporters and Camera crews should be banned from all war zones. Reporters become nothing but slanted tools for the Media's opinion on how things should be done.
No. Do you think the Terrorists show their recruits videos of fellow Terrorists getting shredded by American troops? Of course not! Its not good for Morale! Reality it may be but no one is going to sign the dotted line. You have two ways to win a war: Attrition and Perception. You either kill all of the enemy or convince them that they cannot win (Many times a combination of the two). The N. Viet used and now the Terrorists/Insurgents/Whatever are using the Perception game to win. Take away the Media and they have no chance of winning. Yes, sometimes Ignorance is Bliss.
The followup video is available online and uncut. Pretty sad. http://www.ogrish.com/archives/isla...ases_new_sniper_video_juba_2_Oct_23_2006.html
Your opinions seem to originate from the same level of loony illogic as the 9/11 conspiracy theorists. The difference between reporting on an Al Qaeda training manual and CNN airing terrorist snuff propaganda is the devastatingly greater psychological impact seeing our guys getting whacked has compared to reading about it. So you think Al Jazeera reports everything- like all the schoolteachers and children that are getting blown up by Islamists? How about posting a citation where we can read an example of Al Jazeera publishing anything that would be considered demoralizing to the Jihadist and supportive of the U.S. troops?
It sounds like your idea of fairness is for the media to publish propaganda for both sides, but it's about the facts on the ground. You misinterpret fact as propaganda. The reason is your inablity to accept the truth when it doesn't fit the predetermined plan and worldview. Your side is so caught up in a fervor of partisan ideology that anyone presented a truly balanced view is attacked in a way that would make Senator McCarthy proud. When Iraqis open a school, that is good news that seems to justify Bush's actions, but attacks and bombs tell me more about how the war is going. It doesn't much matter how many schools are opened if it's not safe to walk there. Maybe there isn't much good news, because there really isn't much good news. The CNN reports are important, because they tell me that snipers are operating against our soldiers at will. This isn't a sustainable position for our troops, this isn't a grand offensive like D-Day or Iwo Jima, this is driving around like policemen in the middle of a gang war, and getting picked off like flies. You think too little of the American people, that information should be kept from them, that they can't judge how a piece of film could be used as propaganda, skills that many learn in school, (which you don't think the government should pay for).
Spider: Your recent comments are so muddled in contralogical argument that I am really at a loss to relate any of them to the issue. I note that the opportunity that I presented to you to provide a coherent response- viz a link to a single instance where Al Jazerra published anything demoralizing to the terrorists has gone unanswered.
Spider: OK- that is a coherent example of Al Jazzera having a policy of publishing straight news in the English edition but of course they follow up with one of their other policies of airing any propaganda they are given by the terrorists. http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/00A5BE42-F85B-4C6B-AC05-ABFBD6730D7A.htm Aljazeera airs al-Baghdadi audiotape In an audiotape broadcast by Aljazeera, a purportedly major figure in the Iraqi uprising has said the killing Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, will strengthen fighters' determination. I could not confirm that the articles like the one you linked to in the English edition website appear in the Arabic edition which goes to my original question.
Why isn't propaganda news? Could a piece of propaganda be aired as part of reporting about the propaganda war? How tightly should the media be controlled, and do you see any danger at all in that?
Of course we can address the issue from an entirely detached, progressive/philosophical perspective and say Jane Fonda had every right to pose on a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft weapon and giggle as she pretended to shoot down American planes and the press had every right to widely cover the propaganda. Unfortunately that kind of freedom of the press and peoples right to know divided our nation and lost that war. WWII was carried out with a pragmatic policy of censorship which screened out Tokyo Rose- type enemy propaganda and showing pictures and real-time reporting on Allied casualties. The country stayed united and we won that war- after which we got back to an uncensored free information environment. Isn't there a practical middle ground from these lessons so that we can have a wartime policy where American media are not utterly detached from the consequences of publishing material that is created by terrorists implicitly to demoralize their enemy and recruit Jihadists? I believe the answer depends on how seriously you take the threat the terrorist Jihad represents. If you believe our troops who are risking their lives every day deserve all the support we civilians can provide...then their safety as well as that of our homefront trump the right of the media to broadcast terrorist propaganda.
I thought we were defending freedom. Vietnam wasn't lost because we allowed the anti-war message on the air, but was abandoned because enough Americans were tired of the lies and deaths. Forget Fonda, what about the millions of people protesting in Washington and cities all over the country? You can't get Americans to support an unpopular war without complete totalitarian control of media, which would be reprehensible. WWII was different, everyone knew what is was about and supported it.
Oh, golly, Spider, that's absolutely, categorically false and untrue! The American people believed what the government told them and what the news media broadcast. The American people were not told of the horrendous casualties of the Normandy Invasion for weeks, even months! And by that time, the war was raging elsewhere. No, Spider, you're absolutely wrong! And in this war, just like the Vietnam War, the media is pressuring the American people with their own agenda, and NOT providing an accurate picture of the war. I.e., they never, ever, provide coverage of the normal life in Baghdad ...which goes on in an almost normal fashion. No, they cover the violence because that's what sells advertising and newspapers! World War II would not have continued, especially in the Pacific, if the media did what they're doing today and with the Vietnam war. The people would have been overwhelmed with the deaths and the violence. Baron Max
I think you yourself are a victim of this propaganda war. The normal aspects of life in Baghdad are irrelevent. The media covers the violence, because, guess what- THAT'S THE FREAKING STORY. You are wrong that people would not support a war simply because of the level of casualties.
If the news media covered violence in the same way, about every area of the world, then I'd say 'Fine', but they don't! They focus on a few people's death as if it's horrendous, yet they say virtually nothing about the thousadns of deaths in places like Darfur or in central Africa. See? It's not the same, it's the media's intention to focus our attentions and further their own agenda. Hell, if they covered the violence in NYC or LA as much as they cover it in Iraq, New York City and Los Angeles would seem like war zones or worse! I think you give "the people" much too much credit, Spider! Baron Max
Except that they aren't finding dozens of young men's bodies at a time, tortured or beheaded, and they don't fish bodies out of the LA river every day.
Naw, sorry, you're right. They only fish bodies out of the LA river every OTHER day. So ...yeah, it's not quite so bad, huh? But, interestingly, isn't the population of Iraq about the same as the entire state of California? If so, then we should also check the murders in San Diego, San Francisco, ....all of the cities. Then maybe they would be pulling bodies out of rivers every day! Baron Max
