Journalists Die, the Networks Lie, Iraqis Ask "Why?"

[Thoran]

I just want to thank Bardan... there's no way I could've force fed myself that whole load-a-bull, but reading Bardans responses did a nice job of giving me an overall feel for the article.

[Skunk]

Please don't shoot the messenger.

I feel like adding that to my signature.

If you post an article that does not tow the popular line, you tend to get one of three responses. Either the author's credentials are questioned (the more respectable response) or you yourself appear in the firing line (the popular response) or someone will say something along the lines of "Line X proves it's propaganda and I didn't read it any further" (infrequent - but not rare).

Very rarely is the piece critically examined in the way that Bardan did.
Hats off to you! [img]graemlins/check.gif[/img]

[ 04-09-2003, 09:02 AM: Message edited by: Skunk ]

Just a thought but... the USA has been able to virtually destroy the entire Iraqi Military, why on gods eath if they actually wanted to target those journalists didn't they put a 2000 pound, laser guided bomb into that hotel to take them all out? not just 3 measely reporters out of dozens? The US knows that you never send a tank to do the job of a GBU-24.

The whole notion that the US wanted to target non-embeded journalists is beyond ridiculous....and to suggest it is a slap in the face for every veteran that has ever served in the US armed forces.

[ 04-09-2003, 09:08 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

[Davros]

Originally posted by MagiK: Just a thought but... the USA has been able to virtually destroy the entire Iraqi Military, why on gods eath if they actually wanted to target those journalists didn't they put a 2000 pound, laser guided bomb into that hotel to take them all out? not just 3 measely reporters out of dozens? The US knows that you never send a tank to do the job of a GBU-24. The whole notion that the US wanted to target non-embeded journalists is beyond ridiculous....and to suggest it is a slap in the face for every veteran that has ever served in the US armed forces.

You could report for FOX [img]tongue.gif[/img] - 3 measley reporters, slap in the face, GBU-24 - pah [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Lets stick to the facts shall we rather than the emotive jingoism. The hotel was targetted by the tank and that has been admitted by CENTCOMM. WHY is still to be established - there are two versions of events and we await the truth. You would like to know the truth wouldn't you, cos I surely would.

Originally posted by Davros: Quote: Originally posted by MagiK: Just a thought but... the USA has been able to virtually destroy the entire Iraqi Military, why on gods eath if they actually wanted to target those journalists didn't they put a 2000 pound, laser guided bomb into that hotel to take them all out? not just 3 measely reporters out of dozens? The US knows that you never send a tank to do the job of a GBU-24. The whole notion that the US wanted to target non-embeded journalists is beyond ridiculous....and to suggest it is a slap in the face for every veteran that has ever served in the US armed forces.

You could report for FOX [img]tongue.gif[/img] - 3 measley reporters, slap in the face, GBU-24 - pah [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Lets stick to the facts shall we rather than the emotive jingoism. The hotel was targetted by the tank and that has been admitted by CENTCOMM. WHY is still to be established - there are two versions of events and we await the truth. You would like to know the truth wouldn't you, cos I surely would.[/QUOTE]It isn't Jingoism to say that US soldiers would not target journalists just because they were not embedded as the story would imply.
My statement is right on the money.

[Davros]

I'm not suggesting it was deliberate, but please let's not kid ourselves that there haven't been many sad accidents of friendly fire and trigger happiness in this fracas. Whether this turns out to be another sad mistake or a case of returning fire is yet to be established.

I find nothing wrong with my assertions of jingoism either - you were being overly emotive in the statements I listed. If you had made the statements from your last post instead of what you posted in the earlier one then I wouldn't have labelled that post with the epiphet that you are protesting.

Actually Davros, I have been a bit dismayed at exactly just how many "friendly fire" accidents there have been...several planes, several British Commando's, some american units, and reporters I do expect better from todays military....we haven't seen these kinds numbers of "friendly fire" accidents since World War II.

[Davros]

Originally posted by MagiK: Actually Davros, I have been a bit dismayed at exactly just how many "friendly fire" accidents there have been...several planes, several British Commando's, some american units, and reporters I do expect better from todays military....we haven't seen these kinds numbers of "friendly fire" accidents since World War II.

Davros extends the hand of friendship - on this we agree. Along with you, I would have hoped that things would have progressed much further in the past 10 years in terms of preventing this sort of thing.