|
Possibility for a draft? (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Zild |
| The thought police have come for me 5 times already. |
|
|
| NeoPhono |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
(P.S. - this commentary of mine is not directly pointed at Neo's comments. It is, more or less, pointed towards the winger bloggers complaining about the negative coverage. More can be found here:
http://mediamatters.org/columns/200612190008) |
I'm not taking it personally, but I just want to reiterate:
I don't think there's an "agenda" by anyone (right or left wing) to report the news a certain way. Even if there is one, I don't think it's being carried out. I simply think that "bad" news sells better than "good" news, so we tend to get a whole heck of a lot more of it, on every front, including Iraq.
My personal view on Iraq is that it was begun with "good" intentions, but has turned into an un-winnable, catch-22 type situation. We're screwed if we stay, re: continued Western and Iraqi deaths as well as increased hostility towards America. And we're screwed if we leave, re: Iraq descends into full scale civil war and America is blamed for the bloodshed plus further instability in the region.
It's just a mess. |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: |
Bush Speaks on Troop Increase; Rejects Iran Talks
Meanwhile in Washington, President Bush made his first public comments Wednesday since admitting he’s seeking to increase the size of the US military.
President Bush: "I'm inclined to believe that we need an increase in the permanent size of both the US army and US marines. I've asked Secretary Gates to determine how such an increase could take place and report back to me as quickly as possible."
Several military commanders have warned the US is overstretched in Iraq and Afghanistan. President Bush also repeated his dismissal of calls to negotiate with Iran.
President Bush: "I read the other day that the foreign minister said we'll sit down with America, when they leave Iraq. No. If they want to sit down with us, for the good of the Iranian people, they ought to suspend their program, we made that clear to them." |
Source: Democracy Now |
|
|
| Zild |
| I kinda hope we start getting drafted. |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
Am I the only one sick of hearing such disingenuous rubbish and propaganda?
| quote: |
President Bush: "I read the other day that the foreign minister said we'll sit down with America, when they leave Iraq. No. If they want to sit down with us, for the good of the Iranian people, they ought to suspend their program, we made that clear to them." |
|
|
|
| Lilith |
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
Am I the only one sick of hearing such disingenuous rubbish and propaganda? |
No draft for you!
Straight to room 101 for re-braining ASAP, dont mind the rats! :eyespop: |
|
|
| DJ Shibby |
| quote: | Originally posted by NeoPhono
I didn't say a thing about political bias in the media. That goes both ways, if any way.
What I'm stating is that media outlets make more money by reporting the "dark" side of news events. There are a lot of good things that are noteworthy that happen each day both at home and even in *gasp* Iraq, we simply don't hear of them. Whether it's your local news or even the multinational news giants, they all know the same thing; death, destruction, misery and conflict gets peoples' attention.
We watch the news, the news channels want more viewers, so they report what gets our attention. They report all the death and destruction they can handle. Therefore, no matter what your political slant, you do tend to get more of the negative side of things then the positive. I don't think there is any political conspiracy when it comes to the reporting of the news. I do think that the dollar speaks louder than the hope of even-balanced news reporting. |
It's basic human instinct; genetic survivability.
We've been doing it for millennia: public executions bring the most entertainment to the masses, while equally having the added trait of keeping them damn well in line, because no one wants to end up on the scaffold.
You want to place blame on our ed up social tendencies? Sure, you can look back 10 years, or 100 years, or even a thousand.
But really, we don't have to look any farther than ourselves. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
Who is this traitorous librul that states such blasphemy?:
Why does Rich Lowry, the National Review Editor, hate America? |
Because it sells! ;) |
|
|
| NeoPhono |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Shibby
It's basic human instinct; genetic survivability.
We've been doing it for millennia: public executions bring the most entertainment to the masses, while equally having the added trait of keeping them damn well in line, because no one wants to end up on the scaffold.
You want to place blame on our ed up social tendencies? Sure, you can look back 10 years, or 100 years, or even a thousand.
But really, we don't have to look any farther than ourselves. |
WTF? I'm not trying to "blame" anyone for anything. I'm simply making the statement that "bad" news sells. |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: | Originally posted by NeoPhono
WTF? I'm not trying to "blame" anyone for anything. I'm simply making the statement that "bad" news sells. |
LOL. That was my initial reaction as well :p. |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
So I'm kind of curious now. Are (some) people actually brainwashed enough to think that there's some "good" to war, especially one like this? Is that really how dependant and attached (some) people are to leaders/power structures or the system in general? "Where's the good news on THE WAR?" Wow. Are you (generic you) that irresponsible and degenerate that you still need to rationalize it after everything that's publicly known regarding this war? It takes a truly weak individual to work so hard on maintaining a delusional state and keeping their conscious from bothering them. Wars of agression and empire doesn't mix with "good news" or good anything for that matter. I'd almost go as far as to say that war and good news don't mix period, but I'm not a pacifist so I recognize legitimate use of force in self-defense (which certainly isn't the case here).
And please define victory as far as this "war" goes. What were the stated goals and objectives to begin with? You mean the ones based on blatant lies and propaganda? How are they different now? What reason do any of you here have to believe a single word coming from an administration on ANYTHING, given their track record of dishonest, unethical, and unconstitutional modus operandi?
And please don't tell me it's rebuilding and stabalizing the region now. That's not going happen. Iraq is now a breeding ground for "terrorists" for decades to come. I'm not an expert on terrorism, but I can guarantee that bombing another country to , torturing civilians, raping women & children, and all the other horrible that's happened/is going on will have people pretty ing pissed off. That experience doesn't exactly fade from memory very quickly, regardless of easily it does when you're not the victim of it. Ofcourse, a (somewhat) REAL threat that the current crime syndicate in the white house have single handedly created only works in their favour all to well. Infact, it's almost necessary to maintain power and introduce new totalitarian legislation.
There's a bunch of other stuff on my mind but I can't be bothered to type it all down at the moment. Plus, it's a little pointless trying to talk any sense into people who willingly choose to remain ignorant. Any person with the slightest shred of decency should be furious about how things are at the moment, both abroad and at home, as opposed to coming up with new rationalizations to make them feel better about it. |
|
|
| Zild |
| Good post but those people you're aiming it at wouldn't understand in the first place. |
|
|
|
|
