Another viewpoint of the war

Off Topic
1

I am really turned off by the US news media’s “reporting” of the news. The major networks present the war as if it was a football game, with flashy graphics. Plus they are just puppets for the military… they are just mouthing what the Pentagon tells them. That’s not what journalists are supposed to do.

Instead of investigating things like that phony document about Iraq purchasing uranium that the adminstration presented to Congress, the media is doing stories on how “cool” the weapons are. It’s just total propaganda in the guise of “news”.

I found out about a website that is a hub for stories from other sources, from other countries, etc. It’s just a ton of links to stories from all over the web, with another viewpoint on the war. If you are happy with the version of the news you are already getting, then I would say don’t bother looking at this site, it will just upset you.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/

2

Interesting comment from Brit Hume (sp?) this A.M…

“The media is covering this as if it were a political campaign not a war.”

Pretty accurate from this side of the 49th…

“What the mass media offers is not popular art, but entertainment which is intended to be consumed like food, forgotten, and replaced by a new dish”

~ W. H. Auden

3

Glad to see all the “multi sided” links. No bias whatsoever. I especially liked the one to the secret of the “remote controlled plane” flown into the world trade center, and all the explosives placed by the USA before the attack. Then there was a link that happened to also discuss all the secret UFO knowledge.


If you are going to post a link, be sure it isn’t run by nuts with an agenda.

4 
 Goddamn it Lumpy...
5

Just for the record, that website is also critical of Bill Clinton. It’s not anti-Republican, it is equally critical of Democrats. Obviously the war is the bigggest thing in the news so a lot of attention is on that, but if you go through older links, you will see that they also went after Clinton.

I agree that there are some wacky conspiracy theories they link to, but I like to read how other countries are reporting on the war, which they provide links for (Including Arab countries, Australia, UK, other European countries).

I just find network coverage unwatchable. It’s like they have no minds of their own, they just parrot the White House. How come there are no stories about Vice president Cheney’s still being on the Haliburton payroll, and how Halliburton will make millions of dollars on this war? There are many aspects to this war that are not being spoken about in the mainstream press.

6

It’s my understanding that Halliburton is out of the running at this point.

7

Ummmmm…Propaganda is part of the war. I thought everybody knew that. Getting your information from multiple sources is the key. The truth is generally somewhere in the middle.
Multiple sources confirm we are kicking ever-lovin’ ass in this war. That’s what I do know.
I take what I hear from CentCom and the pentagon with a grain of salt. They can only give out some much correct info before they start helping the enemy.
History will bear the truth, all we get now are some cool pictures of shit blowing up.

8

I found it particularly humorous last week when the CNN personnel were giving the Al Jazeera spokespeople crap for “biased reporting” and “acting as a mouthpiece for the Iraqi government”. Fortunately, CNN doesn’t pander to its audience or government and is above all of that propagandistic stuff, providing nothing but the objective truth, regardless of the consequences. CNN had the gall to criticize showing dead and imprisoned Americans (only hours after I saw dead Iraqis lying in the dirt on CNN). Furthermore, Al Jazeera has been criticized for showing pictures of dead civilians because it favors the enemy.
Americans get what they deserve in terms of news coverage though. The networks are businesses, looking to produce a marketable product, and the consumers have demonstrated that they prefer loaded “news”. In these neo-McCarthyist times, the media must make sure that it is clear to all whose side they are on; they do so all too well. If people want perspective, it’s out there all over the internet and world. That brings up another problem though, namely, American-exceptionallism and the lack of multilingualism in the US. Americans don’t care about the opinions of the rest of the world, and even if they did, they don’t speak the languages to understand their opinions.

I’m in a foul mood- I’d better stop typing before I really go off.

I recommend these amongst others:

Repubblica.it

Contrary to what seems to be popular belief, no one will die of brain infection if they read a perspective they don?t like. Sometimes (ok, almost always) you get more out of reading that which you don?t like than out of that which you do like. When challenged by alternative views, you must actually think about what you believe and why you believe it; thus one learns regardless of whether their opinion is changed.
Enough rambling, time to study.

9

lumpy,
You still haven’t answered one of my questions to you. Did you vote for algore or George W. Bush in 2000? I always like to know what someone’s perspective is when I discuss things with them.
The key when dealing with journalism is understanding that every journalist has a bias. If you are a fairly intelligent person you can draw your own conclusions. The media likes to editoralize. That’s usually when I turn the channel.
Please answer the question above.

10

I did see the Clinton links. I never said it was liberal biased, or democrat biased. I found it to be anti-American biased. Show me one link on that site that says anything positive about America.


America may not be perfect, but why is it the only that gets trashed? Apparently all other countries are perfect.

11

U.S.= Good Guys
I am a Democrat, I did not vote in the last election because I didn’t register in time, I live in New York which went for Al Gore. I regret not voting but my vote wouldn’t have changed the election.

When Bush was elected I knew in my heart of hearts that he would do something like this… start infringing on our personal freedoms, mismanage our foriegn policy, gut our social support services. It has culminated in his decision to get us into a war which I feel is unnecessary. I love my country which is why I don’t want to see it driven into a ditch. In my opinion, that is exactly what George Bush is doing.

This war is not about freeing the Iraqi people. We do nothing about the people of Tibet who are oppressed and occupied by China. We did nothing in East Timor which was oprpressed and occupied by Indonesia. We do nothing regarding much worse dictators and much worse human rights violations.

This war is not about breaking UN security council resolutions. If it was, we would have invaded Israel long ago, as they have broken dozens of resolutions and ignored dozens of reprimands.

This war is about imposing a friendly government in the second oil-richest country in the world, it is about making Republicans like Dick Cheney (Halliburton board member) and Republican cronies in the arms industry rich. First we sell countries the weapons. Then we confiscate them a few years later because “those weapons are a threat”, we destroy them and use up a bunch of our own weapons. Repeat cycle. What a racket!

If you want to know what this war is about, follow the money. Guys like Richard Perle and Dick Cheney and their pals will make a ton of money, at the expense of taxpayers and “disposable” Iraqi lives. The oil fields will not be controlled by the people of post-war Iraq, they will will be privatized. Guess who will ultimately benefit… Bush cronies in the oil industry, with sweetheart deals. The fact is that this war has been in the planning since BEFORE George Bush was elected, and before 9-11. It is a result of planning by the Committee for a New American Century, a faction of neo-conservatives in the Defense Department. It has nothing to do with security, terrorism, or Iraqi freedom. Even Iraq’s next-door neighbors like Iran (their enemy) do not consider Iraq a threat.

George Bush ran on a platform of “no nation building” and prioritizing domestic issues. Now that he is elected, he has shown himself to be merely a puppet for war hawks (or should I say Chicken Hawks) in his cabinet.

I suppose that’s why they didn’t make Jeb Bush president… he had too much of a mind of his own?

I do support the ordinary guys who have to slog it out in our military. What I don’t support is the abuse of American taxpayers and American resources and American firepower for a gratuitous war that is intended to make wealthy people even wealthier.

I think this war is illegal, and it sets a dangerous precedent for the future. The president should not have the sole discretion to launch military attacks. If Pakistan were to invade India tomorrow, what could the US. say about it? “Do as i say, not as I do”? Unlike some people here, I see the weakening of the UN by disregarding their wishes as a complete disaster (yes, we NEED the UN to settle disputes). I see the alienating of former allies like France and Germany (not to mention Russia and China) as a plainly bad idea. America cannot be so arrogant to think that she can go it alone in the world and still thrive. By the way, the UK’s involvement is marginal, and they will not be sending any more troops to the Gulf. This is clearly America’s war, and this “coalition” is a paper tiger.

Sadly, only 15% of Americans even have a passport, and have no idea how badly this war is impacting the US’s standing in the world community.

I hope that begins to give an insight on my positions. By the way, I’m not mad at anybody here about this. Unlike some people who want to send the protestors to Siberia, this kind of dialogue is exactly what makes America worth arguing over. Without the freedom to disagree, we have NOTHING.

I will be the first to say I would LOVE to be proven wrong about any of this (not by your posts, but by actual future events).

12

Way to go Lumpy.

13

To Lumpy and others who think this is about the arms and oil industry making money:

Guys I got a different perspective on this. First of all I am 40. I’m also an investment banker with an MBA. Haliburton didn’t make it to the next step in the bidding process. They stand to make nothing on the reconstruction.

Secondly. The arms industry is a misnomer. Most of the arms used by the military are systems made by conglomerates that have thier hands in a lot of things. Boeing for example makes satellites, commercial aircraft, helicopters and lots of other things. True munitions companies like Alliant Tech (tank and machine gun rounds) don’t make a lot of money from the military. They earn much higher profits from the civilian market. Uncle Sam pays cost plus and he is not too generous on the plus side. They will see very little if any increases in business from this war.

Lastly, big oil makes the most money when oil prices are stable and the market is secure and effecient. They can deliver oil at that point in the most cost effective manner, from secure suppliers to customers with increasing demand. When they have to pay “spot prices” and hire tankers for spot delivery it costs them profits. This war is not going to help them on the profit side of things. Uncertainty is not how you make money in the oil business. Effeciency and predictablity combined with increasing demand from customers enjoying a robust economy is how you make money. Too be quiet sincere the US based Oil Companies are at a major disadvantage in Iraq after the war. If the oil fields are put out to the highest bidder for development after the war, the most likely winners will be the Russians. They are flush with cash and are buying reserves very aggressively. They also have recent development experience.

Thus ends the lesson. This war is not about a conspiracy to make money for arms merchants or oil companies. It’s about doing the right thing. A dictator like Saddam who kills women and children and the innocent has no place commanding a military. It’s wrong and he has to go.

I am proud of W and the military and I hope they kick ass over there and that it serves as a warning to these other wanna be Hitlers. It’s not easy to do and death and combat is not for the faint of heart but it has to be done.

14

Lumpy, over and over again I read about how this war is going to hurt our standing with the international community. I’ll admit to being very conservative (not isolationist though), but I just can’t bring myself to give a fat baby’s dick about what France or Germany think about us. Why do you feel like we need the rest of the world to like us? Can you explain your thoughts on this or at least point me to some article that articulates what is wrong with pissing off France and Germany?

15

This whole war is stupid anyway we already took over the southern oil fields, why do we need the rest of the country?

I’m not serious but if you think about it…

16

hedo, thank you for the commentary. I weigh in at the ripe old age of 41.

Lumpy, you’ve been brainwashed. Go back to your liberal organizations with their pet issues. Tibet, are you kidding? This one’s a favorite. Oh by the way, what sort of a threat does Tibet pose to the world? If you want to help Tibet talk to the Chinese.

17

Hedo is a very smart man. Did my dad suddenly start posting on the forum?

18

Hedo…you made complete sense. Its nice to get an educated persons evalation and you sure sound like you have the facts down. I am a military man…so I do what my CEO tells me to do. However…George Bush was pretty much forced to take on Saddam after 911. We started building up for Iraq last February. That was not long after GW delivered his speech on the war on terrorism. America collectively nodded its head in agreement at that time. Most Americans were not aware of the shortly thereafter initiation of the potential confrontation with Iraq. IOW…GW didn’t pull this out of his butt this past fall! It was a product of the war on terrorism…which again…America collectively nodded its head in agreement with after 911. Think people…think…connect the dots!

PtrDr

19

lumpy, restless, and Hedo,
Hedo, I am very impressed. You essentially destroyed the liberal objections. It’s hard to argue with fact. However, restless (bad guys with serious anti-American hate issues) will say what you are saying is just propaganda.
lumpy, thanks for your honesty. I read your post twice. Please pay me the courtesy of reading mine. First of all, there is no excuse not to vote. Normally, I feel that people who don’t exercise their right to vote are bad citizens who basically piss on the soldiers and statesmen who have died giving us this right. Usually, I would dismiss you out of hand and put you in the unretrievable part of the bad person category. restless is locked into that category.
However, at the end of your post you said something that gives me hope. You said you might be wrong. Therefore, I will respond to you. First of all, DICK CHENEY IS NOT ON THE BOARD OF HALIBURTON. HE HAS NO STOCKS IN HALIBURTON. HE SOLD ALL OF HIS STOCKS AND RESIGNED FROM THE BOARD PRIOR TO ACCEPTING THE VICE PRESIDENCY. HE DID THIS SO THAT YOU COULDN’T MAKE THE ARGUMENT YOU ARE NOW MAKING. It is called conflict of interest. Remember, he is already a very rich man who could lecture the rest of his life and make far more money than remaining on the Haliburton board. Please look this up for yourself. Therefore, the insinuation that we are doing this “just for oil” is not only wrong but insulting.
Second, George W. Bush’s comments about nation building were made prior to 9/11. Read what he says about his paradigm shift. The post 9/11 world has changed in a multitude of ways. Now we must fight to change ideas. We hope to replace a bad idea (hussein’s regime) with a good idea (a Democratic Iraq). We are, and should, be pushing the freedoms and rewards that come from Democracy. This is our best defense. Watch what happens when we win. We will set up a Democratic government. Yes, we will have to have a military man in charge for a while to avoid anarchy and chaos. However, we will leave. Read history, when has another country EVER conquered another country, rebuilt it, and then left. We have done it numerous times. See Germany, Japan, etc…
I have real problems with your Tibet argument. It’s like saying, “If we don’t take care of every problem, then we can’t legitimately take care of any of them.” I think that is rubbish. We have a multitude of reasons to attack iraq: survival, promoting democracy, and for humanitarian reasons. Just wait, you’ll listen to the testimony of scientists who will show you that saddam is/was dedicated to our destruction. You are already hearing of the horrors of the regime. Watch and listen, I implore you.
Please realize that many of your objections to W. are based on politics. I admit that my loathing of billy-boy was enhanced by his abhorrent politics. He didn’t help his cause in my eyes by being a disaster. I want you to think about this. In 1998, billy boy said many of the things that W. is now saying. He acknowledged the danger that hussein posed. However, he didn’t stand firm. He allowed the un to be embarrassed. hussein was emboldened because he was allowed to hinder the un’s ability to do their weapons inspections. The inspectors finally had to give up and leave. The early 90’s was the only period when weapons inspections were working. You know why? Because there was a united international consensus. saddam knew it was united. When he was allowed to divide the council through oil contracts (france, russia) and the un losing interest, he began to hinder the inspectors.
Here is another issue you should be concerned with, hypocrisy. Please realize that billy boy bypassed the un altogether to attack kosovo. He went straight to Nato when russia HINTED that they MIGHT veto. There was no protracted diplomatic struggle as W. had the good grace to conduct. There wasn’t any real behind the scenes wrangling. So think twice about accusing W. about that before you realize who really undermined the un. Remember that both Bush’s have given the un a legitimacy THAT THEY NEVER ENJOYED BEFORE.
Which freedoms have you lost exactly? You said you thought he’d take away your freedoms. Don’t you, in the deepest part of your heart (where partisan politics aren’t the number one issue) feel that waiting in a longer line at an airport is the right thing to do? Has George W. touched a single dime of Social Security? Do you realize that without real reform, you won’t have Social Security AT ALL WHEN YOU RETIRE? Have you given his proposal of partial privitization ANY THOUGHT AT ALL? Don’t just regurgitate democratic slogans. Think about it yourself. I would be happy to point out that investing part of the Social Security savings will yield a MUCH HIGHER RETURN than is currently produced. I can show you averages over decades and it yields at least twice the percentage of interest if you invest it in the stock market.
I’m going to stop talking now. However, if you are a good person, you will think about these issues yourself. I will be angry and disappointed (but not surprised) if you end up repeating verbatim what the dnc chariman mcaullife expects you to say.
Don’t be a drone, THINK!!! If you end up disagreeing with me, fine. However, give me some cold, hard facts to back up your argument.

20

Anybody who thinks that war is only done for profit does not understand economics. This war is delaying an economic expansion, which could have occurred months ago. The oil industry gains nothing from the flooding of the market with oil. It would actually be better if the sanctions are kept in place, and Iraq oil kept moving as slow as possible. That would keep the oil prices up, and oil industry profits increasing. An improved economy would mean people could better afford gas, travel more, and buy more SUV’s and less economy cars. This war would be like shooting themselves in the foot. Hope this isn’t redundant after the excellent explanation by Hedo.

It is unfortunate that people hear a load of political bs that has no basis in reality, and just repeat these lies as though they are true without the knowledge or understanding of facts. I often her these people who do not think for themselves too often accuse others of not thinking for themselves.

What makes this war illegal? People keep throwing out this word, but never stating how it is illegal. I presume it is because we supposedly didn’t get a re-re-re-re-approval from the UN. Then again I didn’t get permission to wipe my ass, so I am violating these rules also.

Yes it is a good idea to get news sources from various sources, but it is also important to understand what the source is, and what their biases are. Regardless of what source the news is from, there is going to be a bias. Some organizations might try to be unbiased, but it is impossible. Knowing what their bias is helps to wade through the crap to get to the truth, and not just accept what is being said blindly. It is exceedingly hard to ague with a flat earther who only gets his information from the flat earth society. Not accepting facts and truth only impedes ones own advancement and self improvement.

Stating that invading Iraq is telling Pakistan it can invade India is like saying that the police shooting a bank robber, after he has killed hostages, gives me the right to shoot a neighbor who I didn’t like. Please make true comparisons, not just random ones.

If anyone wants to know what this war is about, it is about the most dangerous regime in the world being stopped. I don’t care what UN resolutions there are. Any organization that considers Libya a good choice for human rights chair has no intelligence. The organization is supposed to improve relations and unite the world. First they vote unanimously to demand Iraq get rid of its weapons, or else, then suddenly it is not a good idea. They would rather play political games rather then work at the improvement of the world. Also, bringing up other events around the world distracts from this specific discussion. What about China? What about Indonesia? Are you saying we should Bomb these countries?

Another thing. I keep hearing people ask, “You want to know why everybody hates Americans?” Yet I hear no one ask, “You want to know why the Nazi’s hated the Jews?” I thought hate was a bad thing, and yet I keep finding people considering it acceptable if it is against America or Americans. Hate is only acceptable if it is politically sanctioned hate. I repeatedly hear people use hate speech over and over, and when people question their motives, they are called hatemongers. Ok, this was not done on this post, but I have seen and heard it repeatedly.

I checked out the New American Century website. While I didn’t read everything there, I scanned a few articles. I don’t have the slightest idea of any power or link they have with the government other then listing Dick Cheney and others as members, though I could see them being members of this organization. It is obviously a conservative organization, but not an extreme one. They are only listing political opinions of how they believe the direction of the government should go. I would expect the same thing from a Democrat political website. What I did find on this site about Iraq before 9/11 was a complaint that the Bush administration might pull troops out of Iraq. They stated that the parts of Iraq Saddam Hussein was not in control of be turned into separate countries run by the people already in charge of those areas.

Our standing in the world is bad only because it is the current fad. And too much of the foreign media is anti-American, so everyone gets anti-American biased news to read. If everyone understood how this is going to positively affect the world (as long as we properly follow through) they would cheer American action. Apparently our biggest supporter is the people of Iraq. Many of the troops are saying they are only fighting because they were told if they don’t, their families would be killed.

United States = Good Guys: Great arguments. Clintons foolish actions failed Iraq, gave away American secrets, and was one of the most corrupt America has seen. He turned the Democratic Party down a road of destruction that may take years to repair. So many were blinded by his success that they couldn’t see the true nature of this man. Even his cabinet members and press secretary speak out about his corruption. (That should start another round of arguments … sorry)