Disgust for the media

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Schmika @ Feb 12 2007, 10:55 AM) [snapback]388870[/snapback]</div>

Very well put Schmika

 

I think the report you head must have exagerrated the specificity of the information. The source on this appears to be a Washington Post story, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7021101345.html, which states:

U.S. Army units in Iraq and Afghanistan lack more than 4,000 of the latest Humvee armor kit, known as FRAG Kit 5, according to U.S. officials. The Army has ramped up production of the armor, giving priority to troops in Baghdad...
..."Those who need FRAG Kit 5 are receiving FRAG Kit 5 based upon theater requirements and priorities," said Army Brig. Gen. Charles Anderson, director of force development for the Army deputy chief of staff. The Army is supplying the life-saving kits "as quickly as we can," he said in an interview and in written responses. "Kits are being flown to theater."

The Army declined to disclose details on the number of kits installed and where the shortages exist.

That the armor shortage story first cropped up in 2004 and that we're still dealing with it does concern me. Best wishes for your son.--Scott

EDIT: the sources cited in the above story are Army Brig. Gen. Charles Anderson and Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

 

Having freedom of the press is a double-edged sword in cases like this. There should definitely be some kind of "Gee, would the people we're fighting like to know this?" filter that stories should be run through before they're printed. But the media's job is to report what they see as the news. These days it has more to do with whether Paris Hilton is wearing underwear, but I digress.

It's not the media's job to determine what should be printed. The ultimate fault here lies with whoever put the report out in the first place. If you don't want to see it in the paper, don't open your yap.

I'd wager we don't hear about the insurgents' problems because:

1. They're not telling the media
2. They're not as organized as the US military.

I do think you're going a little overboard saying the media has supported the insurgency. Unless, of course, they've been calling them "freedom fighters" and helping bankroll them.

Your son is a credit to his country and I hope if he is re-deployed, he comes home safely.

 

If CNN knows it, you can be assured the Bad Guys knew it first.

 

Remembering how the media sucked into the administration's Iraq WMD stories and then, through propagation, their getting much of the public sucked in as well, I'm concerned about this same media jumping on these new charges against Iran.

Bush has already made clear his feelings on Iran. Are we now being set up to be accepting of an attack on that country?

It's not that I'm leery of the media, I'm leery of what the administration spoon feeds to the media, and then the media's blind acceptance without follow-up on their own.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ken Cooper @ Feb 12 2007, 12:51 PM) [snapback]388945[/snapback]</div>

I agree absolutely.I dont believe any accusation put forth by this administration.
Remember the worry about Iraq using chemical weapons on our troops during the initial Iraq invasion.Bush sent in many of those troops with outdated ,not functional chemical protection gear.
Today we understand why the chemical suits werent such a major concern.

 

There are no excuses for shortages. If there are still shortages, it's not the media's fault. The only way to put pressure on those that are responsible for the shortages is to let the public know so the public can apply the pressure.

I blame the administration. They've shoveled billions down the Iraq Black Hole and there are still shortages? Well, why not divert the money from Halliburton's pocket to armor plating?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ken Cooper @ Feb 12 2007, 12:51 PM) [snapback]388945[/snapback]</div>

Bush:
Yes, because they have WMD's....oh, that's right, we used that one last time.
Yes, because they attacked us....oh that's right, that wasn't them, and we used that last time too. :angry:
Dang, somebody manufacture me some intelligence to support what I want to do!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ken Cooper @ Feb 12 2007, 12:51 PM) [snapback]388945[/snapback]</div>

Today's journalists are basically just professional gossips, nothing more. Oh sure, they ask the really tough questions but the person they ask it of could say 'booga booga booga' and the "journalist" would act as if they got a real answer and go on to the next question. The "journalists" are all afraid of getting on someone's bad side and not getting invited to the big parties so they keep their mouths shut. The only time that they really attack is when the person has just about everyone angry at him or her and they're digraced. Then they have an easy kill while doing no real work. As Bill Maher put it so well last season, 'in order to keep the public stupid, they make the people who allegedly report the news to them even stupider" Truly pathetic shadows of the journalists of the Watergate era.

 

I often wonder about the political bent of this site's administrators. For instance, has anyone noticed that when there is a topic of this type that is in any way critical of the Bush administration, suddenly the list of postings is cut off (I used the search mode to find and bring this topic from earlier today back to life).

I'm probably being a little paranoid here but I become disappointed when, at least on my viewing of this site, the whole earlier part of the day (prior to 6:54 pm) is truncated away. Note, the post prior to this one occurred at 5:41 p.m.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ken Cooper @ Feb 12 2007, 11:38 PM) [snapback]389329[/snapback]</div>

I'm not sure I follow. Are you saying the topic was deleted or locked? Sure doesn't look like it from here.