A New Way Forward In Iraq

[Eagler]

Originally posted by Hap
Oboe, is it your contention that were it not for the press and the left, the war in Iraq would at this time be going substantially better than it is?

Also, do you think that what ever mistakes the Bush administration has made are minor as to the outcome of the war when compared to how the press and the left have damaged the war effort?

Regards,

hap

I’m not oboe but yes to the first question..
The left and the slant the media has broadcasted about the war has embolden our enemies ... the AQ won our last election.

The second question is a toss up. but please tell us which war was ever fought mistake free?

[oboe]

Originally posted by Hap
Oboe, is it your contention that were it not for the press and the left, the war in Iraq would at this time be going substantially better than it is?

Also, do you think that what ever mistakes the Bush administration has made are minor as to the outcome of the war when compared to how the press and the left have damaged the war effort?

Regards,

hap

Not at all - the war is what it is, without regard to the press coverage.   I haven't seen any hard evidence that negative coverage of the war by the press has emboldened the insurgents and handed them victories.

I blame Bush and his team for the war.    I see the press as havign 'damaged' the war effort - but (disclaimer) I have been against the Iraq war from the beginning.     I wanted to see OBL captured in Afghanistan, and wasn't ever convinced of an Iraq connection.

[Toad]

I don't see anyone can think that the enemy/insurgents are not emboldened and encouraged by the way the media portrays the daily happenings in Iraq.

[Yeager]

I voted for Bush in both presidential bids, I guess you can say I had a hand in that "coup" too

I'd vote for him a 3rd time knowing who the likely liberal con jobs will be.

[Viking]

Originally posted by Toad
As for honorable intent, Yeager has demonstrated that the intent he approves of in all of this is the removal of a bloody dictator from power and giving that nation's populace an opportunity to hold free elections.

You find that dishonorable?

Yes. When the justification was something very different, and he made that very clear.

[Viking]

Originally posted by Toad
I don't see anyone can think that the enemy/insurgents are not emboldened and encouraged by the way the media portrays the daily happenings in Iraq.

The insurgents are watching US TV, and reading US newspapers? Surely you're jesting.

Al Jazzera never was on your side, and you can't really expect them to be.

[Toad]

Originally posted by Viking
Yes. When the justification was something very different, and he made that very clear.

Apparently you find only the justification dishonorable. Is that correct?

Because in my view, intent is separate from "justification".

The intent was to remove Saddam and give the people free elections. That was done and I think it was an honorable intent.

Do you disagree?



You don't think they get CNN in Iraq?

[lukster]

Originally posted by Viking
The insurgents are watching US TV, and reading US newspapers? Surely you're jesting.

Al Jazzera never was on your side, and you can't really expect them to be.

You don't think the leaders of the insurgency and foreign powers involved keep track of American morale and commitment?

[Hap]

Originally posted by Toad
I don't see anyone can think that the enemy/insurgents are not emboldened and encouraged by the way the media portrays the daily happenings in Iraq.

I'm using Toad's quote as an example of what others have said and or said in their own words.

I don't think US press coverage in any way emboldens religous jihadists.  They don't require, need, or desire emboldening from the West.

Seriously, do you realize that to say so is pretty equivalent to saying the bad guys obtain their motivation to kill us and perserverence in the face of destruction from our press coverage?

Holy Smokes, am I the only one that finds that terribly over rates the power of the western press and under values the impetus of 1500 years of religious zealotry?

But what do I know.  I live in Wyoming.

All the Best,

hap

[john9001]

Originally posted by Viking
The insurgents are watching US TV, and reading US newspapers? Surely you're jesting.

yes they are,how else would they know if they are "winning" the war, and don't call me Shirley.

[Eagler]

of course it does
You don't think Iran and Syria watch CNN?
I'm sure the cheekbones with the bomb belt doesn't care whats on the tele but the ppl who give his leaders money and direction do

[midnight Target]

Originally posted by Toad
Apparently you find only the justification dishonorable. Is that correct?

Because in my view, intent is separate from "justification".

The intent was to remove Saddam and give the people free elections. That was done and I think it was an honorable intent.

Do you disagree?



You don't think they get CNN in Iraq?

Sorry Toad, but the 'Intent' was to make us safe based on the perceived threat from saddam and his WMD. Free elections and the ouster of the dictator were just necessities of that goal.

[oboe]

Originally posted by Hap
I'm using Toad's quote as an example of what others have said and or said in their own words.

I don't think US press coverage in any way emboldens religous jihadists.  They don't require, need, or desire emboldening from the West.

Seriously, do you realize that to say so is pretty equivalent to saying the bad guys obtain their motivation to kill us and perserverence in the face of destruction from our press coverage?

Holy Smokes, am I the only one that finds that terribly over rates the power of the western press and under values the impetus of 1500 years of religious zealotry?

But what do I know.  I live in Wyoming.

All the Best,

hap

No, you are not the ONLY one, Hap.   I think there are two of us.

To the guys complaining about the negative coverage of the war - what did you expect?  Nothing but footage showing US soldiers handing out candy to Iraqi kids while ignoring or supressing all the bad stuff that was absolutely bound to happen?  I'd suggest limiting your exposure to Lincoln Group publications then.

Lara Logan defends the press' coverage better than I ever could in this clip. It's worth a look.

[Sikboy]

Originally posted by Eagler


we won't pull out, nor should we.
If the dems win in 08 and they pull out, then they will have the repercussion on their conscience

 

Politically, the Dems can pull out in 08, call it "Peace with Honor II" and shovel the blame on the previous administration for bungling it. Regardless of whether it is or isn't true, I think that the American public will accept that story over the years.

-Sik

[Toad]

Originally posted by midnight Target
Sorry Toad, but the 'Intent' was to make us safe based on the perceived threat from saddam and his WMD. Free elections and the ouster of the dictator were just necessities of that goal.

Or one could, and I do, say that the intent was to make us safe based on the perceived threat from Saddam and his WMD by removing him from power and enabling free elections for and by the Iraqis.

Thus it is all one.

In short, I think you're quibbling.