The US, UN & Iraq II

and some barking from dogs that are in the hunt, but thats pretty typical as well.

0 Replies

Where is the mooing coming from?

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

trespassers will wrote:
I am neither happy nor unhappy about them. Al Jazeera is of no consequence to me.

I prefer an attitude along the lines you were claiming earlier, when you wrote:

trespassers will wrote:
I have formed an opinion based on the available information and facts as I have read them. If you think that opinion is flawed, please point me to evidence you think will change my mind or prove me wrong.

My attitude has not changed. I am open to learning from information that comes to me from sources I believe I can trust. Where the war on terrorism is concerned, I have no doubt that Al Jazeera's loyalty is on the side opposite mine, and I do not trust anything they say. If it is true, another source will carry the news. I have neither need nor use for them.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

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?

Oh come now... are you seriously going to pretend that little, dumb ole you actually thinks that is what I wrote? (Because it isn't what I wrote at all.) Rolling Eyes

Slow day, snood? Confused

Someone in this discussion complained that Fox was calling this war "Operation Iraqi Freedom", and was pointing to this choice as further evidence of Fox's bias. I wrote (quite clearly, you can read it just up there^) that this was not Fox's choice, but the military's and that as such the use of this name for the operation was not evidence of a bias toward anything but the facts.

Nowhere in that statement will you find any comment regarding Fox's general bias or lack thereof. The statement reads exactly, and only, as it reads. Calling it "Operation Iraqi Freedom" is evidence only of a bias toward the facts.

0 Replies

Listen to Timber, he's right on the money. Many of us did say that this war would be short, and the casualties kept to a minimum. What did you expect? That the plot would resolve itself in 90 minutes, and everyone would meet later at the local tavern to hoist a few?

In two short weeks those troops have set the highest standard in maneuver warfare. They have executed their orders with remarkable little delay, or casualties. The Army and Marines have performed prodigies. The air forces have set new records for successful missions. Two weeks of bombing has delivered more fire on target than in any month of previous campaigns. The Iraqi warfighting capability has been severely tested. Logistically, this campaign is only matched by the logistical miracles displayed during the campaign to oust Saddam from Kuwait. This whole campaign is "Shock and Awe", from the first bombs that hopefully decapitated the regime to the heavy fighting currently being reported around Karbala ... and you know something? We haven't even started yet.

There have been some surprises for those of us who sit comfortably on the other side of the world. I expected more surrenders, and I expected more patience from the homefront. I didn't expect American journalists to aid the enemy, though in fairness most have done a wonderful job of providing the public with pictures and reports from the field.

There is a cliche' about the "Fog of Battle". It remains true, and its false at the same time. The little snippets we see and hear are not the truth about battle, though they are perfectly factual. The reality is being tired and afraid and confused by the chaos in which a soldier is operating. The public has never seen war in "real" time before, but we only see it in flashes -- not the larger picture. The men on the ground don't see the larger picture either, they only see and know what it's like on the little bit of ground they are moving over, or holding. The Fog of War is still a fact of war for most folks. With JSTARS, and other military systems, the battlefield is clearer now than ever before to the General a thousand miles away in his headquarters. General Franks has at his disposal the means of collecting, analyzing and acting upon information right down to the platoon level. His staff can monitor the whole Air Land battle in real time. In that sense General Franks can see through the Fog of Battle better than any of us, or Saddam's best. Ah, hubris! Even with our almost olympean powers, we can not totally control what our enemy chooses to do. In the end it will not matter, Saddam and the Ba'ath Party are dead even if they don't quite know it yet.

0 Replies

Pay no attention to the lowing of the kine. That's just my pack of trained tracking herefords ... harmless, really, unless spooked.

Karbala was enveloped and bypassed by 3ID in three hours. Twenty four hours had been the operational estimate. To the east, the going was a bit tougher, but The Marines there were faced with a terrain more favorable to the defense, what with bridges and all, but the Tigris has been crossed and The Marines now have a variety of open approach routes to the south west of Baghdad. The Iraqi forces have not devolved to route, but have been decisively defeated and are withdrawing. It may be assumed the retreating Iraqi units will attempt to assume and defend prepared positions. Tommy Franks no doubt intends to deny them opportunity to do so. I suspect this evening's battles developed as Recon-In_Force exposed and exploited tactical opportunities, rather than as an intended "Final Push". Mosul and Kirkuk both are under increasing pressure. Throughout Iraq, there are clear signs of command failure within the Iraqi forces. The next 24 hours could be a better example of "Shock and Awe" than was the first night of the Air War.

0 Replies

Well, might be that <museal> is European (German, at least, and French [muséal]).
It just means in relation to museums.

Since I live in GMT + 2 hours (we are having here 'daylight saving time since last Sunday), I've been "in the arms of Morpheus" at the time of that discussion.

0 Replies

There's an excellent Leading Article in today's Guardian by J. Freedland about "Emepror George".

In the last chapter he writes, what some of us noted here before, others disagree heavily and what is reason of some of the "disturbancies" on this thread:

Quote:

Talk like this is not that comfortable in America just now; you'd be denounced fairly swiftly as a Saddam apologist or a traitor. The limits of acceptable discussion have narrowed sharply, just as civil liberties have taken a hammering as part of the post-9/11 war on terror. You might fall foul of the Patriot Act, or be denounced for insufficient love of country. There is something McCarthyite about the atmosphere which has spawned this war, making Democrats too fearful to be an opposition worthy of the name and closing down national debate. And things don't get much more un-American than that.

What has become of American values and idealism? All swept away in this thoroughly un-American war

0 Replies

from today's Guardian

Quote:

As the west's forces lay sacrilegious siege to the holy city of Najaf, as Shia clerics issue fatwas enjoining the faithful everywhere to rise up and repulse the "infidels", as Islamic Jihad sees an opportunity to spread its twisted creed of horror and rejection, as Israel's defence force gives handy tips to American commanders about how to attack and occupy Arab communities, and as George Bush stands up in Philadelphia and mouths crass platitudes about liberating Iraq even as his bombs rain down, little wonder that the Arab street cries out for vengeance.

The US could not find a clear link between Iraq and al-Qaida. Now by its own woeful blunderings, it is creating one.

pdiddie
How about a "McJihad Value Combo"?
And presumably if "they" win, "Bomber Kebab"? Very Happy

Kara
Ok it seems Walter is not going to be very forthcoming on museal. We went round the Imperial War museum (good thing to do when a war is on?!) and saw an Italian truck and I quoted the old joke about it having more reverse than forward gears. Hence when I referred to Berlosconi's political retreat, Walter said it was museal, i.e. referring to museums. (But I'd never heard the word before). ! Hope that makes it clear (as mud probably) Smile

0 Replies

This morning I just heard Jack Straw say that Iran is an "emerging democracy", with which he has had a lot of dealings, and there is absolutely no question of us going to war with them. [Despite Royal Marines coming under Iranian machine gun fire- my comment].

He also said Syria should not support Iraq, but that the idea of widening the war to include Syria and Iran is a non starter as far as the British govt is concerned.

So finally we have a line in the sand. We have had enough of the neo conservative Likudniks. They can fight for Israel without using Britain in future.

That line should have been drawn after the Afghanistan campaign in my opinion, but better late than never.

Straw also commented on the publication of the so called "Middle East Road Map" to peace, as promised by non other that G W Bush. "It will be published soon, because I'm sure President Bush is a man of his word".

Which is diplomatic speak for saying 'it should have been published before now, and if its not done so very soon, we will regard Bush as a liar and a cheat'.

All in all quite a productive 5 minute interview with Straw (miracles do happen).

0 Replies

Steve, did u get to read the article in The Times today as to how hairline cracks are appearing in the alliance between the US and UK troops due to different operating styles ?

Strains of war test the allies

0 Replies

I heard about it but will read article thanks

And just for any who were tempted to believe the ******* stories about the market place missile being Iraqi anti aircraft fire:-

Independent: Marketplace deaths were caused by a US missile
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=393066

0 Replies

An anti-aircraft missile wasn't going to do that much damage. It was insulting.

0 Replies

"Nowhere in that statement will you find any comment regarding Fox's general bias or lack thereof. The statement reads exactly, and only, as it reads. Calling it "Operation Iraqi Freedom" is evidence only of a bias toward the facts."

Exactly - I never said your statement let on either way - hence my question. So, do you think Fox is biased toward the right or not? Call it curiosity.

0 Replies

Is the general feel of the people on this site Anti-War or Pro? Most people I speak to here at home are well against it.

0 Replies

this is definitely a mostly anti-war site.

0 Replies

I would say a majority of the site's members have strong feelings on War in general. The website itself has no stance, allowing proponents of either argument to express their views and to examine the issue. I would say some members would prefer the members of the opposition had less voice, and that their own were more evident. Those members may be found on either side of the argument. So can lots of heat, but if you look hard, you can find worthy spokespersons for either argument among the hotheads and the simplistic. Among the rhetoricians are some thinkers, and there are some parrots. Which are which is easily determined.

0 Replies

hi aja

Welcome to a2k

Mostly anti.

There are one or two "pro" (if anyone can be said to be in favour of war), but their forces are depleted somewhat right now.

0 Replies

JM,

JamesMorrison wrote:

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. [..]

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 would agree and disagree. My prejudice against people rushing to battle and die in a war for their fatherland, right or wrong, is such that I'd tend to suspect just like you that the difference between them, and those who prefer to stay alive and think of how they can participate in the country's future, is one rooted largely on education.

But there's a complication. You mention the INC. I heard last week that a former employee of my mother's now lives in London and works for the INC. My respect to her. But there are many other exiles, highly educated ones, ones that are politically involved, in organisations of their own, who do not agree with this war. Confirming my prejudice about intelligent people not rushing to war to die, they prefer to stay over here and express their disagreement in words - but that they do.

I opened a thread a while ago to collect exile Iraqi views - for and against this war and the way Bush has started it. You might find it interesting.

So - where I would agree with education playing a role in the choice between soldiering and politicking, I would disagree with the suggestion that there's a correlation between education and support for the US/UK war.

0 Replies

Steve (as 41oo) wrote:

This morning I just heard Jack Straw say that Iran is an "emerging democracy", with which he has had a lot of dealings, and there is absolutely no question of us going to war with them.

Well, that's a relief for a change. Most of the "Axis of Evil" rhetorics from Washington seemed to suggest the Americans couldnt even see the difference between the two.

0 Replies

The US, UN & Iraq II

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know