Guest cepheus1 Posted March 27, 2003 Report Share Posted March 27, 2003 The media has no respect for fact, hence all of the sensationalism.For the record, there have already been thousands of Iraqi deaths. The source was BBC news, and that's just from one single tank battle. The only time I've heard them talk about Iraqi losses. All quotes from Fraser! Why is it that people complain about the unreliable media yet seize upon anything that supports their argument :?: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fraser Posted March 27, 2003 Report Share Posted March 27, 2003 Perhaps because, not knowing anyone in Iraq, I have no choice? You have to be on your toes with the media though, see my earlier comment about the gas masks equalling WMD usage. Mind you, there is one alternate source; Dear Raed. It's a blog from a guy in Bagdad. I'd recommend reading it if you have the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest superkingdave Posted March 28, 2003 Report Share Posted March 28, 2003 fraser, i guess you would have had us not kill any german soldiers in the second world war because they had been brain washed by hitler? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fraser Posted March 28, 2003 Report Share Posted March 28, 2003 Nope, the Nazi's were brain washed into attacking another country. The Iraqi people and army are only defending themselves from yet another foreign aggressor. That part of the world has a long history of that. You simply cannot compare the two that way! Meanwhile, seeing as we are drudging up Nazi references, consider these similarities between pre-war Germany and the current USA: - Both spend ridiculous amounts on the military. 50% of global military spending is by the USA. - Both believe that they are fighting evil - Both believe that they are "God's chosen ones" - The enemy is made out to be a threat to their liberty and way of life - Fear is used to get public support. Orange alert, duct tape etc. - Leadership speaches inspire all of the above, using carefully crafted words that aren't quite lying, but sure as hell ain't the truth - Both leaderships cafefully control what the public see of them. From the words they speak to the physical mannerisms used. Hitler was a pioneer with this sort of thing...he was the first politician to have photo ops - Racial hatred and fear rule the day, the Nazi's had the Jews, the USA has the Arabs - Localised attacks and resentment towards these groups. The USA has always had a bad record with non-whites, more so recently with the anti-arab attacks in the USA that didn't quite get covered in the media. Pretty much the same happened to the Jews. - It's OK to disappear someone to a special camp, with no legal representation, no respect for the Geneva convention and torture them at your lesure. As long as they are of your chosen "hate race" - People of that "hate race" are begining to move away. Actually, many whites are also terrified and are getting out of the USA. Hence my sig...I could go on and on on this stuff, but I have work to do... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dan.peterson Posted March 28, 2003 Report Share Posted March 28, 2003 Well these posts are becoming rather long, so will try not to respond point by point where I can. Fraser, you seem to have a few different themes mixed around in your last couple of posts, and it might be easier if we can deal with them separately- (I am trying to stop this discussion sliding in to the situation in which you are either for war, or for Saddam and other generalisations). Much of what you say in your last post I am broadly in agreement with, but still come to different conclusions about the situation we are in now. Broadly speaking these seem to be: 1. Media coverage of the war. ----a. Censorship, and unfair reporting. ----b. Double standards of reporting- i.e. POWs treatment, bombing casualties. 2. Long term after-effects of the invasion. – repercussions in Iraq and for the US internationally. 3. US foreign policy in general. -1a Media coverage in this war, any war, and indeed peace has to be taken with a pinch of salt. These are only reports of humans on the ground, albeit with "scientific" style analysis through the use of computer graphics. Obviously take no one report at face value, and be aware of the filters that the reports have passed through to get to you. Lets not get into arguments about what is, and what is not happening, but it is only courtesy to cite your sources where you are making otherwise unsubstantiated claims. That said, you seem to be succumbing to the conspiracy theorist logic that the influences on our media are all uniformly directed to supporting the US administration- no doubt by some vast impersonal omnipotent power which is close to the US admin. Simply saying "Everything you see on TV has been vetted by the editors of the networks, who have close business ties with the US administration" convinces me of nothing more than your ability to over generalise and misinform. If you could substantiate this with reference not just to TV but also other media, and make the case that all our info is tempered by the wishes of the white house, then it would be interesting. There are still anti coalition voices in Iraq Fisk for one and here you will find examples of bias and double standards but in the other direction. 1b. Double standards of reporting. The POWs was a brilliant example of how little introspection the US media is capable of, becoming incensed over this violation. In fairness, this response is probably uniform in whatever country you are in. And incidentally, there were some questions asked if showing the Iraqi troops was breaking the convention. Apparently it is not illegal to show them, but it is when they are held up to "public curiosity" (article 13) that it breaks it. Fair enough I suppose, but a very thin line drawn by our media if that is the distinction- if not I accept blatant double standards. However I hope you accept that the two images are of very different natures, and hardly on par. RE: Guantanamo Bay. Couldn’t agree with you more- it should be the spirit of the convention followed as well as the letter. Presumably Fraser, as “Everything you see on TV has been vetted by the editors of the networks, who have close business ties with the US administration” then that was precisely the image that Bush et al wanted to project? 2. Long term after effects of the war In Iraq- There will presumably be a generation of war orphans, who will be disinclined towards the US. Whether this will manifest itself as terrorism depends on our record after the conflict. It is not simply cause and effect as you suggest. For the US/UK. War in Iraq must be a powerful symbol of US power, and can easily be projected as imperialism, as such it will no doubt help towards the next generation of little Osamas. Not an argument for stopping the war, as they will be there for as long as the US continues to exert its influence as it does in the Middle East. 3. Foreign policy. Its pretty clear that the record is not good. Short termism, disregard for non American human rights, and business interests are inescapable. The argument partly against this runs that the Cold War was a serious and sincere event, and the change at 89/91 is paradigmatic. No doubt the events should be viewed as part of the larger picture. This should not make the individuals involved in the policies any less culpable. For all that, I would be interested in what you would have the Bush/ Blair if you suddenly had the choice. It seems we are too far in the quagmire of war to do any but pursue this war and make sure that we then take this opportunity afterwards to demonstrate than the west can use its role as world hegemon responsibly. Idealistic nonsense? . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest madu Posted March 28, 2003 Report Share Posted March 28, 2003 Fraser - I agree to what you say, maximum respect. I would only like to add that every person needs to analyse the information he is presented with and challange it. Those who have more facts, more feed from real life and things that happen in the real world - come to more real conclusions. That is why most of the population beleives in what they see on CNN - they've been trained for decades to trust blindly the 'telly'. But the fact of politics is that they actually DO control most things and CAN control everything, but at a global country level. They have the whole mechanism for doing whatever brings them to a goal. And the people in control of media are very powerful people - they go with other powerful people - government, military, even drugs, but again - it is all very limited circle, where everyone has similar interests and thus they stick together. Throughout history - the ones that do not comply with power, disappear. I don't want to sound a smartarse, but population of UK has no clue what is happening at the top of their country - government, bosses, elite... They manipulate the majority like... [obstained from offense] Again, there's no limit to what can be said.. But I do agree that there are many people that are not for war but against Saddaam or his regime or for human rights or their country and policy. Or they are for war because of these/other factors. Or for war but don't care about the actual situation with Iraq.. MY SUPPORT FOR BRAVE SOLDIERS NOW FIGHTING IN IRAQ DOING THEIR JOB [but I really wish they did not have to do this] One way or another, it's great to see that people are not ignorant and write massive essays on this [just remembered it's an SPV forum] lol. Gotta stop!! Now... Ok finishing. End. Over & Out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest inlinesk8a Posted September 6, 2005 Report Share Posted September 6, 2005 why would people be in favour of killing inoccent people? imagine if YOUR conutry was in war at your country at the same place you lived, a group of iraq soldiers killed your mom & dad. why? was they innocent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest drblow Posted September 6, 2005 Report Share Posted September 6, 2005 I'm sorry, but anyone who is for this war simply doesn't know enough about it. Bush and pals have been consistenly lying and misleading everyone about this, inciting post 9-11 emotions against a nation that has absolutely nothing to do with Islamic terrorism. This is despite large operations by the FBI and CIA to prove otherwise, which haven't even picked up the slighest trace of a connection. Iraq is a secular country that is an enemy of all Islamic states, they fought an 11-year war with Iran and they have no friends in the region at all. Meanwhile countries in the middle east who had everything to do with the terrorist attacks are treated as allies because we have business dealings with them, where we support regimes that give their own people less civil and human rights than the people in Iraq have. We don't have business dealings with Iraq. Overthrowing the present leadership will give the US and the UK access to the Iraqs oil, which are the second largest known oil reserves in the world. Not only does Iraq contain lots of oil, the oil itself is very easy (cheap) to extract, refine and export. It is a goldmine for the oil companies, who have already started to carve up the spoils of war, with some of the most lucrative contracts going to companies that key players in the current administration have a long personal history with. Bush's cabinet said in April, 2001 (6 months prior to 9-11): 'Iraq remains a destabilising influence to the flow of oil to international markets from the Middle East' and because this is an unacceptable risk to the US 'military intervention' is necessary." Always remember; everyone in the Bush administration has very close ties to the oil industry. The National Security Adviser has an oil tanker named after her. Each of these people were given huge "parting gifts" by the oil industry when they moved into politics. What is ironic is that the US helped Saddam rise to power, then later supplied him with the weapons that were used to commit his crimes against humanity. The US congress blocked investigations during Regan's presedency into the attrocities. Not only do they turn a blind eye, they actively tried to cover it up. Now all of a sudden "it's important". In addition to this, most anti-western feeling is due to one nation in particular, Israel. This nation is in violation of so many UN resolutions it is unbelievable, yet we are treating a second resolution against Iraq as a ticket to war. Israel is commiting a holocaust against the Palestinion people in their own homeland, worse than anything Saddam has done, yet the US regularly uses UN vetos against any resolutions that attempt to tackle the problem, the US has the most vetos by far in the UN, most relating to this problem. Israel's current occupation of Palestine is illegal, brutal, racist and funded by the USA. By the way, the vast majority of US media is controlled by Israeli-friendly companies. My sig relates to this. The US media is engaging in a campaign that is very similar to the Nazi's rise to power. They are demonising a people that are of no real threat to them, stating that we must attack first "to preserve our way of life". They suggest that all arab states want to destroy us and that we must defend ourselves by attacking them. Fear is used to bring the people in to touch. Shops have sold out on things like duct tape, after "advice" to people to build a chemical warfare shelter in their own homes. They have got an entire nation running scared, and this is being used to fund the governments conquests for power. The US people are being presented with a very racist treatment of all Arabs, with everyone being guilty until proven innocent, that's if you are actually able to get legal representation. Arabs are treated with fear and suspicion, especially in places such as airports. An imigrant computer programmer was recently moved across the US in police custody, held in appauling conditions for over three weeks, all because he noticed that his visa had expired earlier that it was supposed to. Many Arabs have started to leave the US, akin to some of the Jewish population leaving Germany during the 30's. This sort of behaviour, and the continual errosion of civil liberties, has destroyed the fabric of the US, undermining everything that the nation is supposed to stand for. I have more fear of people like Bush, Cheney and Rice than I do of Saddam. Meanwhile at home (in the UK), we have "scandals" when members of the government indicate that they disagree with the current policies. Excuse me, but I thought we were supposed to be living in a democracy? How is that possible when all politions are made to promote the same plans? Our governments are making a mockery of democracy. They aren't listening to the publics desires one bit, and are intentionally misleading us on the issues. Voting once every five years between a choice of two viable parties is a farce. Anyone who thinks we live in a fair and democratic society should get their head out of their arse before they suffocate. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Pity I never noticed this post before, or I would have been on my soapbox for sure!! :o Just had to say though - RIGHT ON FRASER, RIGHT ON!! :twisted: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest illi Posted September 19, 2005 Report Share Posted September 19, 2005 Simple question: Who suffers out of this BLOODY WAR??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest benzo Posted September 19, 2005 Report Share Posted September 19, 2005 Simple question: Who suffers out of this BLOODY WAR??? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Simple 1. Innocent Iraqi civilians 2. Iraqi soldiers forced to fight a war due to a destroyed economy that cannot afford to employ them as it did before the bloody mess started 3. "coalition" soldiers who thought they were going to fight for freedom 4. You and I who pay tax to fund this war when the money should be going to UK hospitals, education and police Who gains? 1. Arms dealers 2. Israel 3. The loony neocons who want to destroy the middle east and control oil 4. Contractors going out to Iraq charging crazy per hour rates for doing nothing 5. Private security firms such as Blackwater 6. Corrupt Iraqi officials Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Disco Stu Posted September 19, 2005 Report Share Posted September 19, 2005 Get Your War On - cartoons by David Rees Caution : contains politics and lots of swearing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bennish Posted September 21, 2005 Report Share Posted September 21, 2005 Would it help alleviate the problems in the middle east if we were to hurry up and stop using oil for everything? or am i just being naive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pwest13 Posted September 24, 2005 Report Share Posted September 24, 2005 I work with an Iraqi who fled his country before the war 1) because he didn't want to waste his life, and 2) he didn't believe in the war, hes a great guy and he left his family are still in Iraq. A few weeks ago his brother was stabbed on the streets. The sad story is that my friend couldn't go and see his brother as he would be arrested as soon as he enters his country for not fighting in the war. His brothers still recovering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bennish Posted November 15, 2005 Report Share Posted November 15, 2005 arrested by iraqi police? but why would they arrest him now for not fighting against u.s.? or do you mean he'd be arrested by coallition forces for not helping? :?: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Looby Posted November 19, 2005 Report Share Posted November 19, 2005 Strewth!! I thought it was only activesync 4.0 that got everybody so hot under the collar. There's not much anyone can do other than not vote but then a law would be introduced to make it illegal not to. It's so very sad. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mcwarre Posted November 19, 2005 Report Share Posted November 19, 2005 Peeps, It's all about Oil. Full Stop. I have been (am) in the UK millitary for 17 years. Oil is the most precious commodity in the world today. People/Nations will fight for that. Full Stop. Cos it is so obvious, that I am glad that I am leaving the military soon and not having to put up with political b*ll*x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest benzo Posted February 12, 2006 Report Share Posted February 12, 2006 Peeps, It's all about Oil. Full Stop. I have been (am) in the UK millitary for 17 years. Oil is the most precious commodity in the world today. People/Nations will fight for that. Full Stop. Cos it is so obvious, that I am glad that I am leaving the military soon and not having to put up with political b*ll*x <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Good luck to you. I respect you even more after seeing those soldiers in Iraq beat those kids up and the camera man laughing and encouraging them today on the news,. You are an asset to the army- 'tis a shame the government pushed you away with their pretense and lies. Again, good luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fraser Posted February 17, 2006 Report Share Posted February 17, 2006 (edited) benzo, don't moan at the squaddies. They are just being squaddies in a time of war. Just wait til the rape stories start to filter through. These types of incidents are common to all wars, ask any historian. This is what war does to people. It's well documented and all of those who pushed for this war are 100% to blame and should have known better. War is NOTHING like it is portrayed in hollywood, except the odd movie now and them that hits the nail on the head. War is always messy. Blair is either ignorant of that, or he simply doesn't care. I hope the pillow suffed with Harliburton stock helps him to sleep more easilly. ps The torture stuff is also well documented. Look up The Milgram Experiment to see what "ordinary" people of the street are capable of. Fascinating & terrifying stuff. 65% of people tested would inflict fatal electric shocks as punishment when told to do so by an authority figure. The innocent deathtool in Iraq is 32,000+. USA casualties 3,000. Iraq and "combatant" deaths are not being counted, but must surely be greater than 32,000, unless you want to admit we are killing more innocents than genuine fighters. The Islamic word now hates the west even more, and the UK is now a big Islamic terrorist target. All thanks to Bush and Blair. Fraser. With a big I TOLD YOU SO!! Edited February 17, 2006 by fraser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pondrew Posted February 19, 2006 Report Share Posted February 19, 2006 ps The torture stuff is also well documented. Look up The Milgram Experiment to see what "ordinary" people of the street are capable of. Fascinating & terrifying stuff. 65% of people tested would inflict fatal electric shocks as punishment when told to do so by an authority figure. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Wow. That takes me back to when I was doing 'A' Level Psychology! A shocking study for sure... :shock: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest leviking Posted March 27, 2006 Report Share Posted March 27, 2006 For. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jeddy1 Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 WELL GUYS I READ JUST FEW POSTS! SORRY FOR CAPSLOCK SO I AM SORRY SAYING THIS BUT FOOKING PRESIDENTS OF U.S.A DID ALL THIS JUST BE OF OIL AND MONEY AND WHATEVER. WHY? SO BUSH AND +++++ OTHERS TO GET THEIR POCKETS FULL OF MONEY AND WHATEVER SO THEY HAVE NICE LIFE AND OTHER PEOPLE GOES TO WAR AND FIGHT FOR THEIR LIFE AND THE BUGS OF BUSH GIVING THEM WHILE BUSH WERE SITTING ON HIS COUCH WATCHING TV AND DRINKING WINE!!! WELL I KNOW ALSO FEW YEARS AGO RENAULT CREATED A CAR WICH COULD WORK ONLY WITH BATTERY AND SUNLIGHT!! WELL U.S.A DESTROYED THE COMPANY WITH 100 NEW CARS JUST CREATED (BUILDED) IN IT... WHY??? BEC BUSH NEEDED TO WIN MONEY FROM OIL... SINCE IRAQ AND U.S.A DIDNT AGREED THEN BUSH STARTED WAR OF COURSE BIN LADEN WASNT AN ANGEL BUT I THINK THIS WAR SHOULDNT EVEN START FROM THE BEGIN.. FOR THE GOOD OF EVERYONE! CHEERS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now