Tartarin, Blatham...thanks for the poetry and the article bits.
It all helps.
trespassers will wrote:Acquiunk wrote:We are going to win this thing, that is a no brainer. What bothers me with Fox is that by escorting any point of view that is not absolutely 100 percent laudatory about this war, they are setting themselves up. So that when the war is won they can crow that they were prescient and steadfast while all other's were carping nay-saying and deserting the ship.
Nobody who has watched Fox over the last week could make such a statement, unless he or she simply wanted to lie. In fact, Fox has featured a lot of field reporting by Sky News reporters whom I have found tend to lean towards being too negative in their assessment of how the coalition is doing, and seem to want to emphasize the negatives. Fox may be
less inclined to paint the US in a bad light here than are some others, but their coverage is not all "rah-rah".
And FYI: the official name for this operation is
Operation Iraqi Freedom. That's not Fox spinning it, that's Fox calling it by the name it was given by the military. (You can complain at the military's choice, but don't pretend it was Fox's choice, or is evidence of a Fox bias towards anything but the facts.)
So, just so little, dumb ole me can understand - you believe that Fox isn't biased toward the right?
timberlandko wrote:Gelisgesti wrote:What is the difference between disagree and violently disagree?
Weapons, smoke, and blood, mostly.
Timber's response gave me a chuckle ...
nimh,
as regards your post of Tue Apr 01, 2003 4:42 pm in which you refer to my query which I reproduce here:
" I heard this morning and also in Tartarin's earlier post about Iraqis that have fled to Jordan now on their way back to "defend their country from American invaders". Since I have heard and seen this from 2 sources it has validity.
Why would these fellows do this? Are they just Patriotic? This might ring true if they had not fled their country to get away from Saddam, which they openly admit they did, but this is not the case. Why would you come back and actively seek to restore the very regime you fled?
What's the Deal with these guys? ..."
To which you replied, in part:
" I think there's the rub: "when they see their own country's flag, irrespective of who is ruling them". That these Iraqis fled from Saddam does not necessarily mean they are not patriotic, as you seem to suggest. "
I didn't mean to question these fellow's patriotism so much as how they demonstrated it. I believe they thought they must die for their country, but this the only choice they see. Given this, there are only two possible outcomes stemming from their decision but they end up dead from either one (Fight the coalition and die sooner or fight the coalition winning the war for Iraq only to be killed by Saddam later).
They saw this situation in a way I could not understand but seems to make sense to a lot of different people in this world, not just Arabs. This is that their death is more valuable to their tribe, people, religion, or nation (and seemingly in that order) than their ability to help these entities by virtue of them staying alive to effect change in their situation for the better.
I hinted to that when I questioned their educational background and wondered if they had gathered and examined all the information that was available to them at the time. This brings us to the following.
There is a group of self exiled Iraqi Nationals who are just as patriotic and committed to saving their country but make their choices based on the fact that they feel they may accomplish more if they are alive and that these changes will only be enabled post Saddam. This group also feels they have but one choice, that being to live to help make their country better. These Iraqi Nationals, known as the Iraqi National congress, seem to see the evils of Saddam and prefer to side with us and for many years have agitated for the liberation of Iraq.
As you might have noticed I suspect education is the key difference between the two different attitudes. Academic education is certainly important but I submit the political environment in which the education is received is probably more important. The Majority of INC members are educated in western environments and it is the values of self-determination and human rights that become instilled in these fellows that makes the difference.
I also feel it would be wise for those in charge of rebuilding Iraq not to try and turn Iraq into a westernized state. Democratize yes, westernize no. I suggest these nation builders take a lesson in reverse from the Moors (yes Moors not Moops) and let the Iraqis be Iraqis.
Respectfully,
JM
I wonder how many McDonalds restaurants will be in Baghdad by the end of 2004. We can have Mohammed McDonald the Clown, the Lamburglar and the Suicide Bomber Sundae.
Welcome, kiose.
At least they can call them French fries...
How about a "McJihad Value Combo"?
And there will the be Terrorville, for the kids. A learning, training and playing experience - all at the same time!
Would you like that 'bunker buster' biggied
Coming soon to a location near you .... GWB's TexMex house O'ribs
Pig roast every Saturday
Special 4th of July Fiesta
Bring whatever is left of the family and celibrate along with us.
Texas two step
And 'KARAOKE'
nimh wrote:I would consider Richard Myers, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a "Real Player". Not a whole lot of days ago he was talking of a "short, sharp" conflict. Now he says: "This is going to be a tough war, a tough slog yet."
I see no contradiction. To expand, "Short" is a relative term... certainly encompassing "Weeks, not months". The current time point of two weeks by definition is at the bottom of the implied scale. "Sharp" implies a vigorous, dynamic campaign to destroy The Enemy. It likely will be a "tough slog" and it likely will be militarily resolved within the stated timeframe. What expectation has been unmet?
JM ... I am reminded of an annecdote : "The most succssful of the Campus Protest Organizers of The 'Sixies stayed in school and hold Chairs in Humanities today". There is much to the notion, IMHO.
timberlandko wrote:nimh wrote:I would consider Richard Myers, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a "Real Player". Not a whole lot of days ago he was talking of a "short, sharp" conflict. Now he says: "This is going to be a tough war, a tough slog yet."
I see no contradiction. To expand, "Short" is a relative term... certainly encompassing "Weeks, not months". The current time point of two weeks by definition is at the bottom of the implied scale. "Sharp" implies a vigorous, dynamic campaign to destroy The Enemy. It likely will be a "tough slog" and it likely will be militarily resolved within the stated timeframe. What expectation has been unmet?
JM ... I am reminded of an annecdote : "The most succssful of the Campus Protest Organizers of The 'Sixies stayed in school and hold Chairs in Humanities today". There is much to the notion, IMHO.
Soon as my head recovers from that spin, I'll tell you about a conversation I once had with a man who was explaining what "is" is.
Curious, snood ... just what in my earlier post gives you difficulty?
The annecdote is opinionated, I suppose, but, then, its an annecdote. My expansion on "Short and sharp" and "Weeks not months" is fully supported by the observed phenomena. I don't see "Telling it like it is" as "Spin".
What about a McDonalds Toasted Twin Towers Sandwich?
timberlandko wrote:Curious, snood ... just what in my earlier post gives you difficulty?
The annecdote is opinionated, I suppose, but, then, its an annecdote. My expansion on "Short and sharp" and "Weeks not months" is fully supported by the observed phenomena. I don't see "Telling it like it is" as "Spin".
Guess it depends on what "is" is, huh?
I just don't happen to see any wiggle room around the fact that alot of people who are prestigious in the politico/military realm were barking alot more boldly before the bullets flew. If you do, we'll just agree to disagree.
I don't dispute there's lots of barking. A lot of that barking is coming from dogs that aren't in the hunt
