http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/26/world/middleeast/26haditha.html?_r=1&oref=login

24 civilians killed. About half were women and children. This is much, much worse than abu ghraib. One step forward, a huge ass leap backwards all because of a couple of people.

They don't understand what kind of war this is.

5/26/2006 7:09:18 PM

Quote :

"They don't understand what kind of war this is."

umm... basically just like any other war in human history

...

i suggest you google "My Lai Massacre"

[Edited on May 26, 2006 at 7:13 PM. Reason : .]

5/26/2006 7:12:07 PM

^yeah, and look how that war turned out. deja vu

[Edited on May 26, 2006 at 7:14 PM. Reason : sdfsdf]

5/26/2006 7:14:30 PM

so you do, in fact, understand

war sucks hard, and it never really turns out ok

there are ALWAYS huge wounds to deal with

5/26/2006 7:15:59 PM

personally, i'm really upset that they were Marines...

5/26/2006 7:16:57 PM

Do you have a point, here?

5/26/2006 7:17:07 PM

Quote :

"war sucks hard"

5/26/2006 7:18:13 PM

Go USA!

5/26/2006 7:23:05 PM

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If found guilty, I hope they're strung up by their thumbs and put to death, I have no sympathy for that sort of thing.

5/26/2006 8:11:07 PM

see, the thing is, you cant let isolated shit like this taint your whole view of things....while this is completely outrageous (and thanks to UCMJ regulations the Marines responsible will be held accountable and tried for murder--not to mention the government's ability to hold them indefinitely before trial in ft. leavenworth....much much much shittier than any civilian jail) you've got to realize that while the media reports this out the ass, progress is being made all over the country....but unfortunately thats not what sells papers and pulls in ratings (not that this should'nt be covered, its just that there's little balance between coverage of bloodshed and coverage of positive progress)

5/26/2006 11:25:49 PM

their governement lacks any real legitimacy

there is no stopping it's eventual collapse and the inevitable civil war that will follow

that's not a guess, that's political science 101

5/27/2006 12:06:45 AM

Sometimes I think that WWII would have never been won with our current media in tow. I think that if these allegations are true, it is heinous. But having our own media fight the war of world opinion against us means we are allowing the media to negate all the progress and sacrifices our soldiers have made. I don't support the war, but as a former soldier, I don't support our for-profit media to paint us all as baby killers.

5/27/2006 12:13:05 AM

don't blame the media for publishing the truth

that place is going to hell, man

sectarian violence, assasination attempts...

why is the insergency still around? why have they not be crushed? it's been FOREVER

it was a failed attempt, and unless we're determined to make them a puppet state of the US (which i might be for, actually) we should pull out now and stop wasting money on a situation that is already doomed

[Edited on May 27, 2006 at 12:17 AM. Reason : .]

5/27/2006 12:16:48 AM

Quote :

"FOREVER"

5/27/2006 12:50:01 AM

Quote :

"I don't support the war, but as a former soldier, I don't support our for-profit media to paint us all as baby killers."

THEN STOP KILLING BABIES. PS, the media has only talked about the couple of soldiers who did this. You can't blame people for then (rightfully) wondering how widespread this is. It's a natural consequence, especially since our goal for true victory is to build some kind of rapport with the natives and arabs.

I don't know why you think a cover up would be good or effective, either. How are you going to stop the iraqis from talking about their families getting killed? It's better to own up now than to get caught lying later. Try to remember what the goal of our presence is.

Quote :

"Sometimes I think that WWII would have never been won with our current media in tow."

FYI, this war is different from WWII not because of the media coverage -- it's different because the warfare and objectives are different. We knew (or should have known ) that this was a bigger political, social, and diplomatic fight from the beginning. It's too bad that soldiers are a poor fit for this kind of tasking.

That's the source of our problems -- not the media.

[Edited on May 27, 2006 at 1:14 AM. Reason : 465]

5/27/2006 1:05:28 AM

Quote :

"I don't know why you think a cover up would be good or effective, either."

you mean like the media covers up / ignores all the good things that happen in Iraq?

Quote :

"It's too bad that soldiers are a poor fit for this kind of tasking. "

You are right. We should send in all of our pansy ass liberal terrorist sympathizers who want to blame everyone but the terrorists for the terrorists' actions. That way there wouldn't be any more pansy ass liberals. Then we could go in there and do what needs to be fucking done, mainly wiping those fuckers off the map wherever they try and hide.

5/27/2006 1:20:30 AM

Try reading a history book some time.

[Edited on May 27, 2006 at 1:27 AM. Reason : ^Is this the same pansy ass who ran from chuck amato? ahahahaha]

5/27/2006 1:26:30 AM

Quote :

"why have they not be crushed?"

Well, there is that whole trying to avoid killing civilians thing that a good portion of the military prefers. Otherwise it'd be so much easier to just level the major problem cities.

5/27/2006 10:26:49 AM

i understand that sensationalism has its perks, but id venture to say that a patriotic circle jerk sells plenty of tv ads and/or paper slots.

as others have said, the fact of the matter is that it shouldnt happen at all.

5/27/2006 11:28:01 AM

the Marines responsible for this need to be executed

and if you want to build any bridges in Iraq they should be executed in country
publicly

5/27/2006 11:56:43 AM

^^^

it was really more of a rhetorical question...

[Edited on May 27, 2006 at 12:09 PM. Reason : .]

5/27/2006 12:09:06 PM

see these posts for the most part are all feeding right off what the media--whether it be liberal or conservative throws out there.....for the real entrenched opponents of the war, they WANT to see the United States lose over there, and for the country to collapse...each piece of media coverage about a bomb going off in a city or a roadside bomb going off is gold to people who think that way....this war is no different from any other media frenzy in the fact that "if it bleeds, it leads".....if you want to argue that point, just look at the hours of coverage the lockdown at the US Capital got due to possible gunshots....the media understands that
1) Average Americans wish to have the news spoon fed to them in forms that they don't have to exert much effort to absorb
and
2) That the stories that grab an average American's attention are that of violence and the like...
simple truths
If you look at any legitimate data or story, the insurgency HAS weakened significantly...today there are not nearly the number of killings and bombings that occured on such a frequent basis following the major fighting in 2003-2004...part of that is due to the fact that the military has adapted to fighting an effective campaign against insurgents, becoming faster and more efficient at finding their hide spots and resource caches.....
If violence such as that going on in Iraq was the end-all doom for the country, then similar violence in countries such as Israel would have brought nations down....the insurgency has little support among the majority of Iraqi citizens, and will only get weaker with time.....I'm not saying the war was justifiable for the reasons given to the public, but I am saying that we are winning the campaign, and the Iraqi people that no longer have to live in fear of being kidnapped, beaten, or murdered have come a long way.

5/27/2006 3:39:32 PM

I can't figure out if this is deliberate misinformation or not

Quote :

"BoondockSt: If you look at any legitimate data or story, the insurgency HAS weakened significantly...today there are not nearly the number of killings and bombings that occured on such a frequent basis following the major fighting in 2003-2004..."

Quote :

"BoondockSt: If violence such as that going on in Iraq was the end-all doom for the country, then similar violence in countries such as Israel would have brought nations down...."

Israel has military, diplomatic, and financial backing of the US. Exactly what other countries have held up as well as Israel? There are plenty or countries that are paralyzed because of long, nagging insurgencies.

Quote :

"BoondockSt: I am saying that we are winning the campaign, and the Iraqi people that no longer have to live in fear of being kidnapped, beaten, or murdered have come a long way."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5020804.stm

Quote :

" Iraqis shot 'for wearing shorts' Witnesses said the three were dressed in shorts and were killed days after militants issued a warning forbidding the wearing of shorts. ... Last week, 15 members of Iraq's taekwondo team were kidnapped between Falluja and Ramadi, west of Baghdad, said a member of the Iraqi Olympic Committee. The kidnappers have demanded $100,000 for their release. "

[Edited on May 27, 2006 at 5:41 PM. Reason : images]

5/27/2006 5:21:20 PM

Quote :

"I don't support the war, but as a former soldier, I don't support our for-profit media to paint us all as baby killers."

so you still don't understand the difference between "a few" and "all" ? ok, fine. then how about you just quit killing babies, aight?

Quote :

" But having our own media fight the war of world opinion against us means we are allowing the media to negate all the progress and sacrifices our soldiers have made. "

yeah, really. goddamn media reporting shit that happens. why dont they just stick to repeating whatever the whitehouse tells them

5/28/2006 3:36:59 AM

who the fuck still thinks its ok to compare this war to world war II

if i was ever going to listen to Scuba Steve i'm sure as fuck not going to now

5/28/2006 10:54:13 AM

seriously, what these (few) Marines did is unconscionable

we CANNOT afford to have monsters representing us on the international field... too many people already see us as that

5/28/2006 12:09:46 PM

Quote :

"don't blame the media for publishing the truth"

I don't blame them for publishing the truth, I blame them for only publishing the truth they think will sell papers.

Its like when they report 1 school shooting like its an epidemic when millions of students all over the country are safe from harm.

They aren't lying, but they can misemphasize.

5/28/2006 12:35:13 PM

Quote :

"I don't blame them for publishing the truth, I blame them for only publishing the truth they think will sell papers."

yeah. because when some US Marines massacre 30 people, women and children, for no reason... well, boys will be boys.

its not like it happens every day, you know. was an indiscretion. poor judgement. the media really should help cover it up, because that sort of stuff is bad for America. Hurts morale and all that. Wouldn't want to make us look bad you know.

Quote :

"They aren't lying, but they can misemphasize"

you misunderestimate them.

5/28/2006 8:21:25 PM

nm.

[Edited on May 28, 2006 at 10:17 PM. Reason : .]

5/28/2006 10:14:24 PM

^^^, ^^ I agree with both of you

5/29/2006 9:30:50 AM

It's a little late but it's a powerful photo anytime of year.


Lest we forget all those who had died for your freedom.

Look closely........

This portrait of our President was brought to you by the many soldiers who had lost there lives due to this "War on Terror".

5/31/2006 1:43:36 PM

Quote :

"don't blame the media for publishing the truth"

what other wars have had this much sensationalist media coverage?

oh man if the modern day media was around in the 40s and our President dropped 2 nuclear bombs...they would have a fucking field day

5/31/2006 1:48:29 PM

the spanish-american war

"Remember the Maine, to hell with Spain!!"

YAAAAAAARRRRRH

5/31/2006 1:52:30 PM

A syndicated column of NY Times writer, Maureen Dowd, just appeared in The News and Observer. She points out that 71 journalists have been killed in Iraq. She also suggests that there's less positive things to report because reporters aren't premitted to report them; they've been told by US officials that reporting about school projects and other hopeful reconstruction projects leaves those projects vulnerable to sabotage and attack.

She also stressed the administration's hand in stifling media coverage, mentioning the fact that pictures of returning coffins have been banned.

The majority of us probably still believe that Pat Tillman died by enemey fire. LOL

[Edited on June 1, 2006 at 12:59 PM. Reason : sss]

6/1/2006 12:56:21 PM

Quote :

" She also suggests that there's less positive things to report because they can't report them; they've been told by US officials that reporting about school projects and other hopeful reconstruction projects leaves those projects vulnerable to sabotage and attack."

Odly enough the press has no problems printing unsubstantiated stories about flushing korans down toilets. Forgive me if I lack sympathy for the "Oh it might cause harm to report this" excuse.

Quote :

"She also stressed the administration's hand in stifling media coverage, mentioning the fact that pictures of returning coffins have been banned. "

Because the banning of pictures of COFFINS prevents reporting on anything positive.

6/1/2006 1:01:07 PM

Quote :

"The majority of us probably still believe that Pat Tillman died by enemey fire."

Yeah, those of us that miss the giant headlines.

The front page of CNN the other day quoted another soldier as saying the he heard Tillman's pained voice yell out "Cease fire! I'm a friendly!" Other than that, theres really no coverage.

6/1/2006 1:01:32 PM

Quote :

"Because the banning of pictures of COFFINS prevents reporting on anything positive."

If you'll reread what I wrote, you'll see a big fat space between my mention of "positive reporting" and my mention of the government banning pictures of coffins.

I wasn't trying to sway your opinion. I don't know how I feel about the media and this war. I was just paraphrasing a column I read. I too am a little wary of the "it might cause harm" excuse. I think they should just come out and say it: there's not much positive shit to report. Take that up with your President, stupid.

6/1/2006 1:07:55 PM

^why so angry all the time??

6/1/2006 1:12:52 PM

I say this:

Quote :

"BridgetSPK: A syndicated column of NY Times writer, Maureen Dowd, just appeared in The News and Observer. She points out that 71 journalists have been killed in Iraq. She also suggests that there's less positive things to report because reporters aren't premitted to report them; they've been told by US officials that reporting about school projects and other hopeful reconstruction projects leaves those projects vulnerable to sabotage and attack. She also stressed the administration's hand in stifling media coverage, mentioning the fact that pictures of returning coffins have been banned. The majority of us probably still believe that Pat Tillman died by enemey fire. LOL"

And he responds with this:

Quote :

"1337 b4k4: Because the banning of pictures of COFFINS prevents reporting on anything positive."

That's pretty fucking annoying. There's a space! I put a space! It's clear as fucking day that I'm not trying to relate the lack of coffin pictures to the lack of positive reporting. And even if there wasn't a space, it would still be clear because such an assertion would be contrary to the most basic logic. A fucking toddler would say, "Bwidgie, that don't make sense."

But, no, he's got his fucking head so far up his ass that he automatically assumes that I'm suggesting a lack of coffin pictures makes "positive" reporting difficult. EVEN WITH THE FUCKING SPACE.

[Edited on June 1, 2006 at 1:26 PM. Reason : sss]

6/1/2006 1:25:33 PM

I say this:

Quote :

"BridgetSPK is a moron And I even left a space. "

6/1/2006 1:40:24 PM

Quote :

"If you'll reread what I wrote, you'll see a big fat space between my mention of "positive reporting" and my mention of the government banning pictures of coffins. "

Quote :

"That's pretty fucking annoying. There's a space! I put a space! It's clear as fucking day that I'm not trying to relate the lack of coffin pictures to the lack of positive reporting."

In a discussion on media and it's reporting on the war and the lack of balance on the reporting you bring up an article in a manner which is presumeably (based on the subject) to demonstrate why the media reports the way it does. Then you bring up the coffins, a seemingly irellevant point to the discussion. It's fairly natural to assume then that your purpose in bringing it up was to strengthen your point.

Furthermore, a reading of your post indicates that spaces do not neccesarily separate rellevant points from one another. In the same paragraph (no spaces) you say that 71 journalists have been killed in iraq and then move on to talk about the excuse given for lack of positive reporting. Pardon me for not reading to deeply into your spacing conventions when you don't seem to follow them yourself.

Quote :

" And even if there wasn't a space, it would still be clear because such an assertion would be contrary to the most basic logic. A fucking toddler would say, "Bwidgie, that don't make sense.""

Your posting history and comments on yourself leave plenty of doubt as to whether you are always aware of the arguments you are making and whether they fly in the face of basic logic or not. Given your history of commenting without a good understanding of the concept you're posting about (see discussion on profits), it's not unreasonable to think you were making such an argument.

Quote :

"But, no, he's got his fucking head so far up his ass that he automatically assumes that I'm suggesting a lack of coffin pictures makes "positive" reporting difficult. EVEN WITH THE FUCKING SPACE. "

It has nothing to do with having my head up my ass and everything to do with making assumptions about the argument you are making from previous comments you have made, the layout of the post and the fact that the comment if not meant as part of the discussion is entirely beside the point and thus irellevant. Pardon me for assuming you wouldn't bring up irellevant points for no reason.

6/1/2006 2:50:13 PM

Quote :

"Pardon me for assuming you wouldn't bring up irellevant points for no reason."

You are pardoned.

I don't know how many times I have to say this...but, trust me, there will be plenty of posts where I say stupid shit, and you can call me out on it. Just be patient.

6/1/2006 3:22:56 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5039420.stm

News reports of another massacre in a different town. They have a video supposedly taken just after the attack. 11 people including women and children were gunned down in a house.

6/1/2006 11:07:58 PM

Should we start a new thread for that? It almost seems wrong not to.

6/1/2006 11:13:30 PM

I guess this one doesnt need its own thread:

US soldiers kill two Iraqi women

A pregnant Iraqi woman in labour and her cousin were shot dead by US forces as they rushed to hospital along a closed road, police and relatives say.

-- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5037124.stm






[Edited on June 2, 2006 at 12:29 AM. Reason : ]

6/2/2006 12:28:34 AM

she was hiding a bomb in he womb.






Seriously, though, the kid would just have grown up to be a suicide bomber.

6/2/2006 1:13:21 AM

6/3/2006 11:03:27 PM

^^^that is totally different, not comparable in the least, and an example of a horribly unfortunate thing that happened in war--not any sort of misconduct.

6/4/2006 12:57:34 AM

can't we just be unified?

war sucks and theres a million different ways to interpret it

but it's going to affect us in some way or another over the course of the next several years and you guys need to fucking understand that because that shit is real.

it's not about who has the right opinion, who sounds the smartest, who has the best data, who has the best anything, really. it's about being young american citizens and how our future can be affected by this war.

quit looking at the smaller picture and think about the bigger shit. you guys are a bunch of idiots covered in mud

6/4/2006 4:50:34 AM

Quote :

"you guys are a bunch of idiots covered in mud"

[Edited on June 4, 2006 at 3:26 PM. Reason : once is enough--theDuke866]

6/4/2006 12:45:19 PM