Salty

iTrader: (14)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060106/...a/zawahri_tape

Yet Al-Zawahri continues to hide...

It pisses me off that the opposition gets to lay on the propaganda fairly thick when any attempt to relay good ole fashioned American propaganda is completely shot down by the media. By ‘American propaganda’ I mean simple and factual updates as to the actual progress we never hear about that would be beneficial for our cause, not hot air from some camel ****er. It's gotten to the point where I have no ****ing clue what's really going on in Iraq because all I hear about are bombings... bombings that make you believe Iraq is the size of 10 football fields from border to border. *sigh*

lojasmo

Is this some O'Reiley talking point? You use this phrase more than I use bolds

jvick125

iTrader: (2)

sighing? That's an emotion. He's making his posts more emotional, getting across how he feels on a subject. You just point out (most of the time) the obvious with your bolding. Although, I don't really mind it that much.

dub2w

haha... Um, you kind of missed the boat on his point. ljasmo is referencing the example, not the "sigh".

Salty, Im not sure what you are trying to convey as you make it sound like we gobble up Al-Qaida's spin while rebuking Fox News. Dont you get it? Both sides are full of bullsh!t

Salty

iTrader: (14)

But the immense good we've done their that hardly ever gets coverage really isn't bull**** because it's psychically happened and/or currently happening. And whenever a news article attempts to cover good which isn't very often, they always follow it up with an "in addition to this..." that highlights something awfully negative.

I mean propaganda in this sense isn't a bad thing when it's true. If we focused more of the entire effort around this then there would undoubtedly be more support on both sides. We spotlighted the milestones and lied a ton to instill American ideology during WWII and won! The argument from the left is that WWII was done for what they believe to be a more just cause. But because the Iraq war has cost $232,000,000,000 as of today and because there's been 2000+ coalition deaths that many liberals feel died in vain, then wouldn't it be that much more important for them to push this factual information as useful propaganda in order to help eliminate the chance of a completely fruitless effort? We don’t even have to lie to do this but we aren’t! Do you see what I’m saying?

MVWRX

iTrader: (1)

...the thing is, there are no un-biased sources that can say we have helped anything in Iraq. Even if only objective information (and all information) was evenly diseminated, there would still be a large split in opinion as to weather or not we've done any good. I know we see a lot of bombings and not so many school openings. But those schools had to be closed, or at least the schools where the kids went before closed, before these new ones opened. Iraq did have a modern society before we went that we tore down and rebuilt...is the new version better? We're all still waiting to find out.


The fact that you have faith that we're doing good is fine...but it doesn't make it the truth.

Salty

iTrader: (14)

Right and wrong. What the media is currently doing is reporting on death statistics. And although a vast majority find death tragic and applauding, there's a very small majority that think death is an indication their favored side is doing well. They may be Jihadists on any continent or even the anti-American store owner down the street from us.

So why not simply post unbiased statistics of what we've done for the economy, infrastructure, (etc) instead and let us soak in that for awhile so we can come to our own conclusions? They could even present this information in a derogatory writing style and I’d still be happy.

Another half-assed thing to consider is although you and I know the car bombings are a result of jihadists, there's never any formal investigation on the matter. We hear about the car bombing on the MSM within a hour of it happening. We see the charred remains of a car and the media automatically assumes it was a car bomb. Does it make it the truth? Not necessarily.

Besides what's seen from eye witness accounts, couldn't there be the incredibly slim chance a car was whipped out by a US smart bomb or the gas tank exploded? So why do you feel it’s more vital to weigh the validity of good information when the majority of the world’s population would consider a step in the right direction?

MVWRX

iTrader: (1)

I see your point, however I would blame the media more for being lazy than any other type of motivation. Death stats are really, really easy to get for them because of the nature of the statistic and who keeps track. I imagine it would be much harder to attain the data on the types of positive things you bring up...let alone trying to quantify something like education or freedom.

Salty

iTrader: (14)

Well at least you see my point. And I agree with this, btw... it's very easy to take a cut and dry car bombing and turn it into a quick, controversial, and tragic story. They've done it so many times they probably think they're filling in madlibs as opposed to writing something new.

But one thing is for certain and that is the MSM isn't helping in the effort at all. One of the most powerful tools that voluntarily gave itself to the US during past wars doesn't want anything to do with the country that gives them the right to run their presses today. I find that very disturbing and borderline treasonable regardless of whether or not you’re for or against the war. That's just me...

gpatmac

iTrader: (3)

DAMN! They beat me to it!

...it's a thankless job, but I guess when you're omnipresent and enigmatic, the credit's out there for the taking.

lojasmo

Ten football fields, eh?



Notice there are only two Iraqi provinces devoid of US millitary casualties.

Salty

iTrader: (14)

Thank you captain obvious! I was making a point on how the relaying of negative news at blistering technological speeds makes the world seem remarkably small. I think everyone realizes the size of Iraq and where the deaths have taken the hardest toll. And btw, approx 500+ people are killed in Los Angeles county each year as a result of violent crime. That's just one county.

gpatmac

iTrader: (3)

Salty,
I'm definitely not picking on you, but to speak in our parlance, you're thinking too tactically and not strategically.

IF we are 'winning' this war, what does that mean? One of the big things I've learned during the planning education I've gotten as an Infantryman is that you can't just array your forces, studiously equip them, and then send them off; confident that victory is already given. You have to define what exactly victory is and further, make certain that all subordinate leaders understand.

What is victory in Iraq for us? How does Al Zariharihari define victory?

If our vision is that all insurgents are destroyed or neutralized or marginalized by their own country folk (the old 'hearts and minds' approach), and the Iraqi infrastructure is strengthened to the point of self-sufficiency all the way down to the village level, and we influence their populace to adopt a democratic polity....is that fully factoring in the enemy? They do have a vote in how successful we are.

The insurgency may not just see victory as 'grabbing your enemy by the belt and hanging on." Their strategy is very obviously not just trying to kill as many of the coalition as possible with (to us) incomprehensible suicide bombers. Their sole intent is to utilize our own media against us. They know that the average American family has 2.2 Television sets and 1.7 broadband-capable computers.

The media, especially the American media, is what (in the planning process) would be considered a 'constraint or limitation' or an obstacle. It's a fact that we cannot change. No matter how illogical, biased, or sensational the media chooses to be, it ain't changing. You can either factor that natural obstacle into your plan to impede or turn the enemy, or you can ignore it and hope the enemy doesn't use it to his advantage.

It's like a wide river between us and our objective. During planning, you can't just 'wish away' the river and you certainly can't change it. It's just there. There are numerous examples in history where a lesser army has defeated an opposing army 5 times it's size by utilizing certain 'constraints and limitations' to it's advantage. The Carthaginian victory at 'the Saw' quickly comes to mind.

In this case, the Insurgency saw the American public opinion as their 'objective', with the media as the obstacle that their entire plan centers around, and their 'weapon' isn't just killing our soldiers but killing them in the most horrific, sensational means possible.

Speaking of logical reporting, this to me is a perfect example of how tremendously addled today's media have become. I know first hand how tragic it is when one soldier loses his life or is forever disfigured, however THAT'S WHAT WE DO! It is a byproduct of the profession of arms. And (to cite some 'statistics') though 2210 deaths seems an outrageous loss, that's over 4 1/2 years. That's quite a bit less than the average of 6400 KIAs per year in Vietnam....over 9 years. Oh, and by the way, a little over 500 of our losses were non-hostile.

Believe me. I'm not diminishing the significance of any one of those losses. I didn't cite the number of wounded, which is ~15k. Those who have been permanantly disfigured or disabled, to me, are every bit as tragic. I'm just trying to support the argument (while futile) that Salty is making about fair reporting. Those who've died or have been grievously maimed are a tragic story; each one, but if their cause is belittled, their deaths are as well. However, like I stated before, they all volunteered, fully knowing that their profession would be to potentially engage in mortal combat.

So, back on topic, how has Al Zarqaiewawa envisioned victory and is he accomplishing it?

-First, I think that he has been VERY willing to accept casualties (very much unlike us), as evidenced by their utilzation of suicide bombers. Therefore, his losses vs. our losses are irrelevant.
-Second, I think that his entire objective was that we leave Iraq; hopefully by high attrition, but seeing that that is unlikely, a mass withdrawal.


Now, all this talk about the insurgencies use of OUR media against us, this is the issue I have. I'm frustrated that our own brass haven't realized and developed some courses of action to 'use' (I am NOT saying manipulate) the media to accomplish some 'objectives' for us. We're not using the lessons we learned in Vietnam. It can't EVEN be argued that we lost Vietnam on the tactical level. We kicked their asses again and again and again. We lost Vietnam because the American people, who drew conclusions based upon the information they got received through the media, completely withdrew any support of the war. The politicians were compelled to begin trying to influence strategy in an attempt to appease their constituents and when that backfired (civilians telling soldiers how to fight ) they were compelled to order the withdraw the troops or else they wouldn't get reelected.

Honestly, sometimes it just seems to me that 'the brass' (my military and civilian chain of command) are as wary of the media as the state is supposed to be about the church. I'm in no position to know, but sometimes I wonder if there has been a General Order issued which forbids all outward contact with reporters because it would be treasonous or something. Even in my current line of work, recruiting, our commercials and sponsorships are WEAK and ineffective. No commercials or sponsorships would generate more interest than what we're currently poluting the airwaves with. It all just makes me like the and know-it-all that I am.

Salty

iTrader: (14)

My point is that suicide bombings don't determine who's winning the war just as good statistics don't either, especially if everyone knows they're using our own media against us in this case. So if we both agree on this then why not post on these good statistics as frequently as they do for car bombings? Let the people decide.

Another thing to add to this is that if everyone knows they're using our own media against us, then the media is that much more to blame for promoting their propaganda.


Absolutely!