News What Are the Implications of Shock and Awe Tactics in Baghdad?

[kyleb]

Originally posted by Nicool003
I had just responded to another of kyleb's posts so I wasn't thinking to clearly...sorry.

well at least you admit it.

 

[Nicool003]

Well, despite what one might think from watching Faux News, there is still no evidence of Iraq using any banned weapons. The supposed SCUDS that were launched turned out to be perfectly legal (ironic term) short-ranged missiles.

'

It wasn't just fox news so you must not watch the other channels I watch... Also it has been online on a very trustworthy website that has things up a day or more before the news ever has them on...

 

[damgo]

^^^ :) Where at? Debka? aeronautics.ru? None of the places I consider reliable have reported even good suspicions of banned missiles. The worst confirmed thing so far is the NBC protection suits found in that Iraqi hospital...

Njorl -- I feel ya.

 

[Nicool003]

Ahh! Now I see! Fox news is not reliable because it is actually run by republicans AND democrats instead of just democrats who change everything or don't tell you everything because they don't like the president! Instead (like i have said before) you want the democrats and their wonderful Clinton to come back so Bill could run to Canada because he doesn't have the intelligence to know that 1) there isn't a draft! 2) He is too old . In case any of you don't know or chose not to listen, Bill clinton ran to Canada to escape getting drafted to war. Yes and those other democratic stations also want bill back so he can lie to the country again the democrats just love those presidents. Yes I see your point completely Yes I see. You don't like republicans so now Fox News is unreliable. Well they aren't the only station to say that and there are also websites like i mentioned...





In case you said that to Njorl because I kinda snapped at him then once again I am sorry.

 

[BoulderHead]

Originally posted by Sensei
we're quite the iconic culture. i just fear our very thoughts may eventually become slogans, nothing more than parroted back synaptic renditions of what those in power wish us to believe.

You mean like; Oh, that Saddams a baaaad man... He must be stopped...

Originally posted by Kerrie
all day friday on the major corporate media news stations, i heard the term "shock and awe"...i got the feeling that they wanted to be responble for setting a theme of the destruction done...personally i feel corporate media is ridiculous...

Ever notice how 'they' all have the same slant?

 

[kat]

I'm quoting a bit offPhotoDude.com He grabs the quote from CBN. This is the first time I've read their site so reader beware. I don't discredit the info due to that but..I do..do...my due...diligence as you should do yours!


Paul Strand: “What I just heard from a highly placed source here is that they've discovered, they've captured chemical warheads, they're Russian, they have Russian writing all over them and they are chemical warheads. Of course, they can't get into them and find out if there’s chemicals because once they open them they'd all die right there on the spot. But they're going to ship them off for testing.”

“They also captured a launcher that was able to shoot these very munitions that they've captured. And they’ve captured a man who mixes the chemicals, that was his job with the Medina Division which is the division we're facing right now near the city of Karbala. So all these things leading the military here to believe we might have been hit by chemical shells any time now, and we're not sure we've got them all. So those are the developments here near Karbala about 60 miles south of Baghdad.”

 

[damgo]

Whoa! Take it easy there Nicole... cmon, let me at least make some outrageous liberal claims before you go attacking me for them!

Anyways, I think Fox is unreliable, because, well, everytime I've watched them they seem to be. They're too gung-ho, and, well, biased for me to take them seriously. Incidentally, I think the exact same thing about many liberal sources--you'll not see me quoting IndyMedia, for example.

Anyways, so I'm curious, what is this site?

 

[russ_watters]

Anyways, I think Fox is unreliable, because, well, everytime I've watched them they seem to be. They're too gung-ho, and, well, biased for me to take them seriously.

I don't watch FOX news because they try too hard to make the news exciting. Not quite the same as their mild right leaning bias.

I tend to watch CNN because with their resources they generally have the best information. And I can tell the difference between fact and opinion, so their mild left slant doesn't bother me.

 

[Nicool003]

Take it easy there Nicole...

That would be Nicool or Nick.

 

[damgo]

Ooops! My bad. :) Oh, you asked in another thread (I lost which) where I hear rumors from... usually it's from www.agonist.org[/url] , [url]www.dailykos.com[/url] , [url]www.tacitus.org[/URL] and a number of other blog sites. I've found them to be usually pretty accurate, but I try and qualify things if I haven't seen confirmed on a major media outlet (besides Faux or al Jazeera ;) ).

 

[Nicool003]

well one website (the drudge report) is very good I find it to usually be faster than the media and it hasn't failed me yet.

 

[kyleb]

the drudge good for many things, i would definitely not use it as my only source though.

 

[Nicool003]

I didn't say it was my ONLY source...

 

[Phobos]

Originally posted by Adam
"To liberate the Iraqi people, we're going to bomb the hell out of Baghdad."

You may be upset about the war, but the US is not "bombing the hell out of Baghdad". It is bombing the hell out of the military/government targets in Baghdad. There is a huge effort to avoid civilian deaths.

Iraq on the other hand is reportedly using its civilians as shields and killing those (or the families of those) who refuse to fight.

 

[russ_watters]

You may be upset about the war, but the US is not "bombing the hell out of Baghdad". It is bombing the hell out of the military/government targets in Baghdad. There is a huge effort to avoid civilian deaths.

Iraq on the other hand is reportedly using its civilians as shields and killing those (or the families of those) who refuse to fight.

Two conveniently ignored, yet hugely important points.

 

[kyleb]

i think they are both good points, the latter as well as the fact that the "huge effort" is still leaving many civilians in its wake were things i expected when this war was proposed in the first place.

 

[Phobos]

I should add that, at least in Basra, it would seem that the Iraq military is not letting the cilivians flee the city (shooting/mortar shelling groups trying to leave). The are keeping the civilians in harm's way, I suspect, in order to cause more civilian deaths so they can win the political war. I think Iraq knows it can't beat the Coalition military toe-to-toe, but they think they can win the propoganda war (and so far, they are doing well at that).

 

[kyleb]

ya, unfortnatly when you back people into a corner they often start pulling every dirty trick in the book.

 

[russ_watters]

ya, unfortnatly when you back people into a corner they often start pulling every dirty trick in the book.

So murdering your own people is just a "dirty trick"? Wow, is that all the Iraqi people are worth? These "dirty tricks" may land Saddam in front of a a Nurenberg firing squad and they are on par with the things that Stalin and Hitler did to their own people.

as well as the fact that the "huge effort" is still leaving many civilians in its wake were things I expected when this war was proposed in the first place.

Certainly civilian casualties were expected - they are in fact unaviodable in a war. But how many do you think we have killed? by my estimate if we believe without question the reports of Iraqi tv, we've killed something like 150. Considering the tonnage we've dropped on Iraq, that's an extrordinarily small number.

 

[kyleb]

well when it comes down to the honest action or dirty trick line, which side would you put it on russ?

 

[damgo]

These "dirty tricks" may land Saddam in front of a a Nurenberg firing squad

Like he's going to end up anyplace else anyways? That's the problem with leaving people with nothing to lose: They don't fight fair. If hiding in cities and guerrilla tactics are the only way the Iraqis can fight back, that's how their going to fight back.

 

[kat]

Originally posted by damgo
Like he's going to end up anyplace else anyways? That's the problem with leaving people with nothing to lose: They don't fight fair. If hiding in cities and guerrilla tactics are the only way the Iraqis can fight back, that's how their going to fight back.

I'm sorry, but I don't care what the circumstances are fair/Saddam's regime is an oxymoron.

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by damgo
Like he's going to end up anyplace else anyways?

Well that was just an illustration - I think he's dead already.

well when it comes down to the honest action or dirty trick line, which side would you put it on russ?

when it comes down to the green or beaver line, which side would you put it on, kyle? What an utterly meaningless question.