Thanks (AP) and what were you thinking General?

MrLabGuy · #1 08-18-2007, 12:32 AM

WASHINGTON (AP) - "The No. 2 American commander in Iraq said Friday that coalition forces are planning "quick strike raids" aimed at smashing al-Qaida and other insurgents in far-flung parts of the country before the U.S. brings some of its buildup troops home".

I'm sorry but there are some things that should be announced after a planned coalition strike. Not before.

The relationship between media and the armed forces is a strange one at best. I can't imagine how WW II would have ended if todays media were reporting on the beaches on Normandy.

"Over 425,000 Allied and German troops were killed, wounded or went missing during the Battle of Normandy. This figure includes over 209,000 Allied casualties, with nearly 37,000 dead amongst the ground forces and a further 16,714 deaths amongst the Allied air forces. Of the Allied casualties, 83,045 were from 21st Army Group (British, Canadian and Polish ground forces), 125,847 from the US ground forces. The losses of the German forces during the Battle of Normandy can only be estimated. Roughly 200,000 German troops were killed or wounded. The Allies also captured 200,000 prisoners of war (not included in the 425,000 total, above). During the fighting around the Falaise Pocket (August 1944) alone, the Germans suffered losses of around 90,000, including prisoners".

Just imagine todays media take on D-Day right after the battle. Enough to make you think that we would have quit shortly after the victory and the world would be a different place today.

Michael

Sponsored Links

Quicksilver · #2 08-18-2007, 01:28 AM

I wonder if these military folks are using the media to create some sort of cause and effect or are they really that dumb? But you bring up a good point.

There is a world of difference between society today and society during "D" day. People took seriously the phrase loose lips sinks ships. Everyone including the media was on the same page regarding the war effort.

Today it’s difficult to understand the motive behind what some call the news. It appears that the story is more important than the effect it will have, who will be hurt, or the quality of what is being reported.

Remember how Geraldo Rivera drew a map in the sand with his finger
In Iraq? Some folks thought what’s the big deal? Others thought something entirely different. I suppose therein lies the problem. Everyone has an opinion, and every opinion is right. As long as it gets me what I want then it’s all good.

Eric5273 · #3 08-18-2007, 02:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quicksilver

I wonder if these military folks are using the media to create some sort of cause and effect

Bingo!

They are doing whatever they can to pursuade the American public to continue to support this war. Whatever he told the media was probably a carefully thought out statement that was approved by his superiors and intentionally planted in the news media.

noncom23 · #4 08-18-2007, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric5273

Bingo!

They are doing whatever they can to pursuade the American public to continue to support this war. Whatever he told the media was probably a carefully thought out statement that was approved by his superiors and intentionally planted in the news media.

That takes the cake. Propaganda. Geeessshhh!

And to think it works on the greater populace here.

Quicksilver · #5 08-18-2007, 10:54 AM

Propaganda has always been used in the time of military conflict. These days as you correctly point out "it works on the greater populace here" but instead of a positive slant to achieve a purpose, these days it appears to be an art manipulation by liers and idologist who have their own agenda.

That's the reason people should believe very little of what they read.

MrLabGuy · #6 08-18-2007, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric5273

Bingo!

They are doing whatever they can to pursuade the American public to continue to support this war. Whatever he told the media was probably a carefully thought out statement that was approved by his superiors and intentionally planted in the news media.

Wow...I had no idea...All that negative reporting by the news media about the war is really an attempt to "persuade the American public to continue to support this war".

I had no idea the news media was just a spokes-mouth for the government used to manipulate the populous.

Thanks Eric!

MrLabGuy · #7 08-18-2007, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quicksilver

Propaganda has always been used in the time of military conflict. These days as you correctly point out "it works on the greater populace here" but instead of a positive slant to achieve a purpose, these days it appears to be an art manipulation by liers and idologist who have their own agenda.

That's the reason people should believe very little of what they read.

Propaganda was indeed a powerful tool in wartime...Difference is the media at the time worked with our government in a time of war for the good of the country.

Now, it takes a different role sensationalizing every aspect of the news without contemplating the consequences. Just look what passes for news today in terms of Linsey Lohan and Paris Hilton. Guantanamo now becomes a place where our enemies are denied American rights and placed in a bad light. The media takes the position that many on the far Left take condemning the fact that these prisoners of war don't get due process and court appointed lawyers.

I don't believe this was propaganda because we are actually doing what was said. I think this was in response to the current media situation where we needed to report on our mission to counteract the medias position that we are doing nothing. Reporting that we are pulling out is also necessary to appease the public due to the constant media barrage on this subject.

Fact is this would have never happened in years past and it does nothing to help our cause or troops.

Eric5273 · #8 08-19-2007, 12:47 AM

I never said it was propoganda. I said you can bet it that whatever the general said was approved by his superiors and was probably intentionally leaked to the media.

noncom23 · #9 08-19-2007, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric5273

I never said it was propoganda. I said you can bet it that whatever the general said was approved by his superiors and was probably intentionally leaked to the media.

Thats why it is propaganda...

Eric5273 · #10 08-19-2007, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrLabGuy

Propaganda was indeed a powerful tool in wartime...Difference is the media at the time worked with our government in a time of war for the good of the country.

Working with our government isn't always what is good for the country.

Sponsored Links