1
   

Propaganda 101

 
 
Reply Thu 20 May, 2004 07:27 am
The following scenario is related by Lt Col Ralph Peters, Author of" Beyond Baghdad "and illustrates the playing field on which the US military must play.

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/21201.htm

An excerpt:

That propaganda is increasingly, viciously, mindlessly anti-American. When our forces engage in tactical combat, dishonest media reporting immediately creates drag on the chain of command all the way up to the president.

Real atrocities aren't required. Everything American soldiers do is portrayed as an atrocity. World opinion is outraged, no matter how judiciously we fight.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 563 • Replies: 6
No top replies

 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 May, 2004 07:35 am
Unfortunately too many are willing to listen to Al-Jazeera and dismiss the reports from our military on the ground in Iraq. We will have done a wonderful thing if we succeed in Iraq. And we will succeed only if the American people think we should.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 May, 2004 07:35 am
mercy percy...the NY Post again
0 Replies
 
perception
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 May, 2004 08:09 am
Blatham

Peters is published by several news services, except the NTTimes and the "choke" LA Times. It is coincidental that this time it is the New York Post. Why do you never say a disparaging word about the biggest swamp rat of all "Krugman"? NYTimes or the "Wannabe comedian" Maureen Dowd?

Do you disbelieve Peters allegations about Aljazeera?
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 May, 2004 09:25 am
:::
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 May, 2004 09:40 am
perc

Old bud...I have said negative things about Dowd, though not often. I've said nothing negative about Krugman, because I've found no cause for me to do so.

Peter's piece is filled with absolutes and false generalizations. There is no more certain way to identify lousy and lazy thinking than that. Lousy thinking leads to lousy conclusions and lousy lousy journalism.
0 Replies
 
perception
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 May, 2004 10:53 am
blatham wrote:
perc

Old bud...I have said negative things about Dowd, though not often. I've said nothing negative about Krugman, because I've found no cause for me to do so.

Peter's piece is filled with absolutes and false generalizations. There is no more certain way to identify lousy and lazy thinking than that. Lousy thinking leads to lousy conclusions and lousy lousy journalism.


And I suppose Krugman backs all of his wild rhetoric up with irrefutable facts
HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Propaganda 101
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 04/28/2024 at 02:57:15