Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Good articles on the war situation in Iraq

  1. Mar 28, 2003 #1
    Here's a list of some of the more informative articles I've read about the war in Iraq. These are reporting or analysis pieces, no editorials on whether the war is a good or bad idea.

    Doubts and Questions: Slow Aid and Other Concerns Fuel Iraqi Discontent Toward United States

    In Nasiriya, Marines Find an Urban Fight They Didn't Want

    Time to stop being Mr Nice Guy

    Hackers cripple al-Jazeera sites

    General: A Longer War Likely
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38166-2003Mar27.html [Broken]

    Allies Risk 3000 Casualties in Baghdad - Ex-General

    31 Marines wounded in An Nasiriyah friendly fire
    http://www.pilotonline.com/military/ml0328war.html [Broken]

    UK aid ship docks at Iraqi port

    C.I.A. Warned Pentagon of Guerrilla Tactics

    A ‘turkey shoot,’ with Marine targets

    And Now, the Good News
    (this last is an op-ed, but I realized the above articles were mostly emphasizing the problems)
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 29, 2003 #2


    User Avatar

    http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_765790.html?menu= [Broken]
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44925-2003Mar28.html [Broken]

    http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=iraq&s=easterbrook032803.1 [Broken]
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  4. Apr 2, 2003 #3


    User Avatar

    Heres a good one on the proiteering going on...

    Cheney's gang the lead profiteers:

    http://www.counterpunch.org/floyd03292003.html [Broken]
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  5. Apr 2, 2003 #4
    Re: Heres a good one on the proiteering going on...

    Seriously, amp, do you really believe that kind of crap? Just look at the way it's written. The author is not only biased, but he appears to have a seething hatred for anything republican. How can you expect the article to be objective?
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  6. Apr 2, 2003 #5
    Re: Re: Heres a good one on the proiteering going on...

    Sure it is biased...but the facts are true, nevertheless. Ideol;ogy doesn't change facts, so calling someone a liberal doesn't make them wrong.
  7. Apr 2, 2003 #6


    User Avatar

    Zero, its difficult to give Alias those kind of facts,

    because she (I think) honestly believes the bul... er..um propaganda.
  8. Apr 2, 2003 #7
  9. Apr 2, 2003 #8


    User Avatar

    Damgo, the criticism was probably from their competitors

    after all Haliburton had more than two megamillion dollar contracts.
  10. Apr 2, 2003 #9
    An article on the Halliburton stuff: http://www.msnbc.com/news/892259.asp?0cv=KB10

    In the last couple days, they've started bidding for subcontracting work: http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Business/ap20030402_600.html [Broken]
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  11. Apr 2, 2003 #10
    Here's the first paragraph of the article you cite...

    "Before the first cruise missile crushed the first skull of the first child killed in the first installment of George W. Bush's crusade for world dominion, the unelected plutocrats occupying the White House were already plying their corporate cronies with fat contracts to "repair" the murderous devastation they were about to unleash on Iraq. There was, of course, no open bidding allowed in the process; just a few "selected" companies--selected for their preponderance of campaign bribes to the Bushist Party, that is - "invited" to submit their wish lists to the War Profiteer-in-Chief."

    First. A factual error... Bush was elected not selected. The polling results were cerified, by law. The fact that Gore wanted to recount certain precincts (that favored him) only, and that the Supreme Court ruled this unconstitutional does not negate the fact that Bush won the election. Whenever, I hear someone say that Bush was 'selected' and not elected, I know, right away, that they are the kind of people that view the world as they want to see it. Thus they have no credibility when discussing 'real facts'.

    Second. Conspiracy theorist type supposition being passed off as objective truth. "just a few "selected" companies---selected for their preponderance of campaign bribes to the Bushist Party." Did the Bush campaign accept bribes? How do you know this? Or, are you just characterizing campaign contributions, and if so, then Gore was guilty of accepting bribes as well.

    Third. "...Bush's crusade for world dominion..." I don't exactly know how to characterize this statement. It's just silly.

    Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, sounds like a duck... it's probably a duck.

    The article is basically a bunch of spew coming from the mouth of someone pissed-off his guy didn't win the election. To take any of the article seriously is simply a fools errand.
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 2, 2003
  12. Apr 2, 2003 #11
    ROFL!!! Occasionally I read Counterpunch or Free Republic just for the humor value in rants like these.
  13. Apr 2, 2003 #12


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I had ignored this thread until now, but wow. I guess they really do believe that stuff, alias. Thats amazing. Bias clearly can make a person see whatever they want to see. I couldn't imagine reading more than the first sentence even for the humor value - its truly sick.

    This whole forum is starting to seem a little useless to me. Particularly my thread on factual errors vs lies. I postulated that its not a lie if you really believe it, but that assumes that people really are capable of telling the difference. Not being able to tell the difference between fiction and reality is delusion. I guess I give people too much credit.
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2003
  14. Apr 2, 2003 #13
    ^^^ IMHO people (some) usually can, but they are rarely willing to admit it at the time, especially if they perceive the person who pointed out their error as an adversary. You have to give them a little time to mull and integrate the truth into the rest of their belief system (and also to save face! :smile:), but eventually their position will often quietly shift.

    It's a rare, rare sight to hear anyone say "you were right, I was wrong." Most of us humans aren't rational enough for that. :frown:


    BTW -- No, I at least don't pay attention to things like that. I find it funny simply because it's so over-the-top, in a Modest Proposal sort of way. I do understand where they're coming from, though. In a similar way you might understand where Anne Coulter's rants are coming from, yet realize what she actually says is pretty ridiculous.

    Free Republic a far-right-wing conservative discussion board BTW, for those who don't know. It's got some pretty good foaming-at-the-mouth-rants.
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 2, 2003
  15. Apr 2, 2003 #14
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  16. Apr 2, 2003 #15


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I've recently become far more jaded than that, damgo.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook