Midnight Judges Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 I don't care. I'm sick of Republicans blaming all the Bush administrations problems on the media. It's pure stupidity. You're shooting the messenger. The NY Times did not make up this civil war threat, that was all very real. Real enough for 1400 Iraqi civilians to die in the last week. The letter at the beginning of this thread is based on falsehoods. I don't care if the guy is in Iraq, he has no clue what he is talking about referring to our media and accusing the NY Times of wanting our troops to die. That's a disgusting an baseless accusation and it's dead wrong. Clearly, he has been lead to these conclusions by FOX news and other propaganda outlets. When are you guys going to learn the difference between partisan hacks (Ailes) making propaganda and actual news sources? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rumrunner6900 Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Yeah, but the first mention of the media was by AFC, slamming the NYT.Funny - you bring up the media, Midnight totally devasteds FOX and now HE is hijacking? Hmmm..... Actually the first mention of the media is in the article that was posted intially....maybe there is some bad blood btw y'all but I'm just pointing this out! I don't care. I'm sick of Republicans blaming all the Bush administrations problems on the media. It's pure stupidity. You're shooting the messenger. The NY Times did not make up this civil war threat, that was all very real. Real enough for 1400 Iraqi civilians to die in the last week.The letter at the beginning of this thread is based on falsehoods. I don't care if the guy is in Iraq, he has no clue what he is talking about referring to our media and accusing the NY Times of wanting our troops to die. That's a disgusting an baseless accusation and it's dead wrong. Clearly, he has been lead to these conclusions by FOX news and other propaganda outlets. When are you guys going to learn the difference between partisan hacks (Ailes) making propaganda and actual news sources? Speaking for myself, some of us do know...thus not reading NYT, or watching CNN/FOX/MSNBC/etc....it's all about entertainment and making money for ALL of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rincewind Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Actually the first mention of the media is in the article that was posted intially....maybe there is some bad blood btw y'all but I'm just pointing this out! Sorry, i should have said the first response post slamming the media was by.... No bad blood, just pointing it out. I agree that both sides of the media are **cked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 I am just glad that this soldier is happy doing what he is doing. It appears that he will enjoy the next couple of years in Iraq just as well as he has spent these last couple. Since no one is killing anyone for any reason I don't see why we even need to stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted March 8, 2006 Author Share Posted March 8, 2006 The very first post on this thread is about how this uninformed troop thinks the liberal media wants there to be a civil war in Iraq. Turns out the Republican media wanted civil war so the guy is dead wrong. It's entirely relevent. Why did you remove "clown"? The article was written by a man named Ralph Peters who may be a clown, but is not an "uninformed troop". The comments in blue, above what Mr. Peters wrote, were added by my buddy who is neither a "clown" nor an "uninformed troop". Mr. Peters mentions the media by name twice, the New York Times...he makes no mention of liberal and in fact his main argument appears to be that many reporters are reporting simply from within the relatively comfortable confines of the Green Zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted March 8, 2006 Author Share Posted March 8, 2006 I am just glad that this soldier is happy doing what he is doing. It appears that he will enjoy the next couple of years in Iraq just as well as he has spent these last couple. Since no one is killing anyone for any reason I don't see why we even need to stay. Another post first kind of guy. A soldier did not write this piece, a reporter did. A soldier sent me the article, I left his comments in it, I'm sorry to have confused you. Maybe I should've mentioned that my buddies comments were in blue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Judges Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 I'M trying. I've been trying all week. The other day, I drove another 30 miles or so on the streets and alleys of Baghdad. I'm looking for the civil war that The New York Times declared. And I just can't find it. Who is the uninformed person who wrote these comments? Is this from a reporter or a troop? Either way, they're just plain stupid. Every news agency in the country, including your precious Republican media, reported on the 1400 dead Iraqi's in this uprising so why did he single out the NY Times? Why didn't he accuse FOX news of wanting our troops to die in a civil war bloodbath? Could it be because this article was written by a partisan hack with an agenda? Could it be that this guy is trying (and succeeding) to perpetuate the liberal media myth and get votes for Republicans in the mid-term elections? You can't be a reporter and a political hack. If you are a hack, you can not be trusted to report he whole truth. That is why the Washington Post is respected and FOX news and hacks like this are not. There is a huge difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rumrunner6900 Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Who is the uninformed person who wrote these comments? Is this from a reporter or a troop? Either way, they're just plain stupid. Every news agency in the country, including your precious Republican media, reported on the 1400 dead Iraqi's in this uprising so why did he single out the NY Times? Why didn't he accuse FOX news of wanting our troops to die in a civil war bloodbath? Could it be because this article was written by a partisan hack with an agenda? Could it be that this guy is trying (and succeeding) to perpetuate the liberal media myth and get votes for Republicans in the mid-term elections?You can't be a reporter and a political hack. If you are a hack, you can not be trusted to report he whole truth. That is why the Washington Post is respected and FOX news and hacks like this are not. There is a huge difference. WP is respected?? By whom? They don't have reporters who are hacks?? Says who? I think your opinion won't be shared by all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted March 8, 2006 Author Share Posted March 8, 2006 Who is the uninformed person who wrote these comments? Is this from a reporter or a troop? Either way, they're just plain stupid. Every news agency in the country, including your precious Republican media, reported on the 1400 dead Iraqi's in this uprising so why did he single out the NY Times? Why didn't he accuse FOX news of wanting our troops to die in a civil war bloodbath? Could it be because this article was written by a partisan hack with an agenda? Could it be that this guy is trying (and succeeding) to perpetuate the liberal media myth and get votes for Republicans in the mid-term elections?You can't be a reporter and a political hack. If you are a hack, you can not be trusted to report he whole truth. That is why the Washington Post is respected and FOX news and hacks like this are not. There is a huge difference. So you still haven't figured out who wrote the article but are convinced "they're just plain stupid" and a "partisan hack with an agenda"? If he would have left NYT out of the equation would you feel better about the rest of it? Did you read my other post about how he seems to be displeased with reporters that report from inside walled compounds and not po'd with the "liberal media". The man's name is Ralph Peters...It is written on the bottom of the article. Not the bottom of the blue comments that I attributed to my buddy in the first post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbrittain Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Who is the uninformed person who wrote these comments? Is this from a reporter or a troop? Either way, they're just plain stupid. Every news agency in the country, including your precious Republican media, reported on the 1400 dead Iraqi's in this uprising so why did he single out the NY Times? Why didn't he accuse FOX news of wanting our troops to die in a civil war bloodbath? Could it be because this article was written by a partisan hack with an agenda? Could it be that this guy is trying (and succeeding) to perpetuate the liberal media myth and get votes for Republicans in the mid-term elections?You can't be a reporter and a political hack. If you are a hack, you can not be trusted to report he whole truth. That is why the Washington Post is respected and FOX news and hacks like this are not. There is a huge difference. That is why the Washington Post is respected and FOX news and hacks like this are not Depends what circles you ride in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blk_rshn Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 I have to be honest I am torn on this issue. I served my country and feel proud for what our troops are doing day-in and day-out while placed in harms way. I want their safe return and mourn the loss every time I see a young face that will not be able to hug their loved ones again. I also have first hand knowledge of what the Iraqi citizen has to endure. Much of my wife's family is in Iraq right now. They are scared, worried about the future of the only country they have ever known and filled with dread every minute of the day. My wife's dearest cousin was raped not long after the invasion and will be the same. A male cousin was shot while going to the market to get food for his sick baby. I remember him from his visit here. He had the nicest smile and looked a lot like the mild-mannered professor that he was. A friend of our family, who is shia and who's wife is sunni, was kidnapped and had his eyes removed and his limbs hacked off before he was left on the family's doorstep. Friends no longer speak to each other for fear of being seen associating with the 'other side' So, I do think there is a great deal of inter-ethnic violence occurring daily? Of course I do. Civil war-like conditions do exist at some level there. Will we be able to stop it? I pray we can, because such a deep and perhaps unretracktable fissure could wind up creating another India/Pakistan with brother hating brother. My heart would forever hang heavy with the thought that my country had a hand in creating the environment for that to happen. My overly-wordy :2cents: worth. Take care and thanks for reading Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Was this before of after the commander of the Iraqi forces was assassinated? IF you were refering to mine?: Presenter: Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld and Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Peter Pace March 7, 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Judges Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 So you still haven't figured out who wrote the article but are convinced "they're just plain stupid" and a "partisan hack with an agenda"? If he would have left NYT out of the equation would you feel better about the rest of it? Did you read my other post about how he seems to be displeased with reporters that report from inside walled compounds and not po'd with the "liberal media". The man's name is Ralph Peters...It is written on the bottom of the article. Not the bottom of the blue comments that I attributed to my buddy in the first post. I said his comments were stupid, not him. I don't know who Ralph Peters is but he must be very smart because he is capable of manipulating others. When I was 14 years old I knew I was very good at manipulating people, mainly my parents (and they are no dumbies). I decided at that age that it was wrong to manipulate people so I stopped progressing down that road. The people in your Republican-controlled media have no such scrouples as illustrated in the hypocrisy of Cavuto's show. Karl Rove would love Ralph Peters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Look, there are a lot of these "The media is lying to you" type emails that hop around everyday. But, until they trump video of war zones in Iraq. That's all they'll be. emails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Good job, RedskinsDiehard, you got exactly the reaction you wanted by posting this thing. Those who think the evil liberal media lies and distorts to harm our troops are reinforced in their belief, and those who think the email is a distorted hit piece are reinforced in their belief too. Just don't try to pretend that you didn't post the thing intending to get those predictable reactions from people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted March 8, 2006 Author Share Posted March 8, 2006 I said his comments were stupid, not him. I don't know who Ralph Peters is but he must be very smart because he is capable of manipulating others. When I was 14 years old I knew I was very good at manipulating people, mainly my parents (and they are no dumbies). I decided at that age that it was wrong to manipulate people so I stopped progressing down that road. The people in your Republican-controlled media have no such scrouples as illustrated in the hypocrisy of Cavuto's show. Karl Rove would love Ralph Peters. Look, there are a lot of these "The media is lying to you" type emails that hop around everyday.But, until they trump video of war zones in Iraq. That's all they'll be. emails. Did you people read the article the whole way through? Its not an e-mail, it is an article, published in a newspaper. If you want, disregard the all the comments in blue when you read the article. Its funny how Mr. Peters has been completely dismissed by some posters who admittedly know nothing about him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Peters plenty of information in google about who he is, and what he writes about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdowwe Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 I don't think anybody WANTS a civil war.But, you'd be kidding yourself if you don't think one is happening right now. Iraqi's are attacking Iraqi's. What do you call that? Insurgents v Terrorists? Freedom Fighters v Al-queda? What? So wait, because Iraqis are attacking Iraqis, there is a Civil War? Im just glad Americans never attack Americans, because then wed have another Civil War. See Innercity gangs, the Klan, all the many other American on American killings we have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 whatever. You know that's a weak argument. There are three main factions in Iraq, and they don't like each other. when was the last time innercity gangs, the klan or whoever, have killed fellow Americans by the thousands in a week? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Judges Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Did you people read the article the whole way through? Its not an e-mail, it is an article, published in a newspaper. If you want, disregard the all the comments in blue when you read the article. Its funny how Mr. Peters has been completely dismissed by some posters who admittedly know nothing about him. Again, nice try at misrepresenting what I said. His article is narrow-minded and unfairly directs it's accusations at the NY Times in a pathetic attempt to smear the mainstream media. Having read a bit more about Mr. Peters, nothing about my opinion has changed. This is not about him, it's about what he said and all his deliberately misleading and inconsistent accusations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted March 8, 2006 Author Share Posted March 8, 2006 I said his comments were stupid, not him. I don't know who Ralph Peters is but he must be very smart because he is capable of manipulating others. When I was 14 years old I knew I was very good at manipulating people, mainly my parents (and they are no dumbies). I decided at that age that it was wrong to manipulate people so I stopped progressing down that road. The people in your Republican-controlled media have no such scrouples as illustrated in the hypocrisy of Cavuto's show. Karl Rove would love Ralph Peters. Did you people read the article the whole way through? Its not an e-mail, it is an article, published in a newspaper. If you want, disregard the all the comments in blue when you read the article. Its funny how Mr. Peters has been completely dismissed by some posters who admittedly know nothing about him. Again, nice try at misrepresenting what I said. His article is narrow-minded and unfairly directs it's accusations at the NY Times in a pathetic attempt to smear the mainstream media. Having read a bit more about Mr. Peters, nothing about my opinion has changed. This is not about him, it's about what he said and all his deliberately misleading and inconsistent accusations. Is this about him? Or what he said? Or what Cavuto said? Seriously, how is what you said being misrepresented by me? I asked if you read the article the whole way through and I still am not sure you did. Why are you so sensitive about the NYT? If he had said the LA Times would you feel better? Do you expect the people providing you news to actually go out and gather it, or sit in a walled compound and dispatch someone to write articles? Do you dispute the account that he provided of his day around Baghdad? Or are you so fuming with this infatuation over the New York Times and Fox News that you can't see anything else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanishomelette Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 whatever. You know that's a weak argument.There are three main factions in Iraq, and they don't like each other. when was the last time innercity gangs, the klan or whoever, have killed fellow Americans by the thousands in a week? From what I've read, there's more factions than 3...There's factions within factions politically. It seems it would be difficult to maintain a 2 or 3 sided civil war when you can't keep alliances with those who are supposedly on your side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 From what I've read, there's more factions than 3...There's factions within factions politically. It seems it would be difficult to maintain a 2 or 3 sided civil war when you can't keep alliances with those who are supposedly on your side. It is easier to have a civil war with multiple factions because they all agree that they hate each other but they will never agree to one unified solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Well, what are you going to call it when the deaths and assassinations continue? A majority of the people probably do support the U.S. troops, but that does not mean they support their fellow Iraq's. Religion is a powerful weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanishomelette Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 Well, what are you going to call it when the deaths and assassinations continue? A majority of the people probably do support the U.S. troops, but that does not mean they support their fellow Iraq's. Religion is a powerful weapon. Crime...When you don't have enough police or enough effective police. Religion is not a weapon, it's a poor excuse for outrageous behavior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.