![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Just finished a good read on the most recent Iraq war, "Embedded," by--drat!
brain function failure again!--anyway, the online booksellers will have the details. It's a series of vignettes of various embedded reporters' adventures. I know that doesn't sound like much, but it really is a rip-roaring good read, and gives a very graphic depiction of the horror house that was Saddam's Iraq. Goes on the shelf with "The March Up." Incidentally, I have sat in on a few conversations with returning military types, plus read some letters and e-mails from folks still in country, and there certainly does seem to be a huge disconnect between what they are saying about conditions in Iraq and what is reported on the news. Something is screwy. Chris Mark |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Just finished a good read on the most recent Iraq war, "Embedded," by--drat! brain function failure again!--anyway, the online booksellers will have the details. It's a series of vignettes of various embedded reporters' adventures. I know that doesn't sound like much, but it really is a rip-roaring good read, and gives a very graphic depiction of the horror house that was Saddam's Iraq. Goes on the shelf with "The March Up." There are a couple of unflattering anecdotes about embedded correspondents in The March Up, including one where a European? reporter is seen looting an Iraqi store. (Marines were looting too, but they got scorched by the sergeant major. Nobody scorched the reporter.) But the neatest touch in the book is when the commander of the 1st Marine Div decides to enter East Baghdad in force, based on his knowledge of the warm greeting his marines were getting in the city. This intelligence he garnered by looking at the TV in his tent, which was tuned to CNN. There was a CNN camera crew embedded in his forward patrol. Incidentally, I have sat in on a few conversations with returning military types, plus read some letters and e-mails from folks still in country, and there certainly does seem to be a huge disconnect between what they are saying about conditions in Iraq and what is reported on the news. Something is screwy. Well, I don't know. Is it screwy or just standard operating procedure? all the best -- Dan Ford email: www.danford.net/letters.htm#9 see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
From: Cub Driver look
conversations with returning military types, plus read some letters and e-mails from folks still in country, and there certainly does seem to be a huge disconnect between what they are saying about conditions in Iraq and what is reported on the news. Something is screwy. Well, I don't know. Is it screwy or just standard operating procedure? Ah, yes, there is that, since the days of Vietnam. One specific example I was thinking of was with our local volunteer fire department. All nine of them were reservests or Guards and were activated for the war. (Their loss was devastating for our community, btw, being firemen, EMTs and citizen's patrol police force [some with military police training], our only police for being highway patrol and county sheriff who are usually far away and busy.) Anyway, some of these guys are back, and the letters and e-mails of those still over there are virtually public property. They are *furious* over the post-war reporting on Iraq, one describing the fellow who intones the CBS radio news as "Lord Hawhaw." I find it interesting that, in contrast to Vietnam, where most of the troops were young unmarried guys, many too young to legally buy a drink when they came back from their tour, who could easily be ignored by the larger society, the troops in Iraq are older, and especially with the Reservists and Guards, well established in their home communities, people whose opinions are respected and valued. So when they say the real story about Iraq is not being told, people tend to listen, especially when they back it up with their own videos and almost real-time messages from the front. Example: a day or two ago AOL on its opening page had a blurb, "Fierce Fighting West of Bagdad." I was with a guy recently back. He read that, scowled, muttered an obscenity and began clacking away on the keyboard. Very shortly we had info from guys *who were actually west of Bagdad* telling us, within the confines of military security, what the real deal was. So you have a bunch of guys and gals, ranging in age from 15 to 78, some who have been to Iraq, some who are about to go, way to hell and gone in rural USA, who know from the horses mouth what the situation is in Iraq from direct personal knowlege who are reading and listening to "professional" news reports that they *know* are, to be kind, less than entirely accurate. I don't know if there has ever been such a situation ever in history. Something big will surely come out of this revolution in information sharing. Chris Mark |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
From: "John Mullen" no@
That might be because WW2 was a war worth fighting. But they are still our troops. And in the case of the reservists and guards, they are our neighbors, the guys who put out your garage fire and issue you burn permits, who check to see if your house is okay when you're on vacation, and work the jaws of life and extract your highschooler from his wrecked Camaro and give him emergency medical aid as they rush him to the hospital...they are *us.* As far as the war being worth fighting, I was sort of reluctantly for it, knowing that something has got to be done about the whole middle east sooner or later, and sooner will be easier than later, and Iraq is probably as good a place to start as any. I did read a very good argument for not having invaded Iraq from Bernard Henri-Levy (author of the excellent "Barbarism With A Human Face"), who described Iraq as "yesterday's enemy" along with Libya and Cuba, while today's real, serious enemies are in order, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Yemen. About Pakistan he said, "the stench of the apocolypse hovers over it." His view is that we should have moved from Afghanistan into Pakistan. Sounds like a plan, but doubtless much, much easier said than done. And, of course, just who is this "we"? The USA alone, or all the west and western allies such as Japan combined? If the latter, exorcizing Pakistan might be doable; if just the US alone or with a handful of allies...I sure wouldn't be first in line to urge my country to do that. And Saudi Arabia? Yemen, maybe we could do something there, but the Saudis--what do we do there? Every body has a solution when sitting around the backyard barbeque sipping beer, but really, what do you do...what do you do? Chris Mark |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cub Driver wrote:
I was particularly struck by the cover of Time magazine, in which Bush makes a second appearance in his aircraft carrier walk-on, but this time hadlined: NO, IT'S NOT OVER, or words to that effect. Time can trust to the short memory of its readers, that what the man said was something entirely different: major combat operations are over, which they most certainly were and are. That cover could have been a paid ad by the Dean campaign! Yet the Good People at Time would have apoplexy if you accused them of bias. I too was somewhat surprised with the Time cover when I saw it. For one of the "mainstream" media outlets, allegedly controlled by the "gumint", surely someone in the editorial review board was going to be sent off to the Gulag for that one! Question the war if you must, but that cover and title was a cheap shot, with little journalistic merit. SMH |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|