COMMENTS:
This is a no-brainer. f course we are the targets. I believe that the media (not saying that they are intentionally complicit, necessarily) is the strongest ally of a guerilla fighter. It's quite obvious to me that, even though we are fighting "their war" (guerilla), our troops are flat-out kicking their asses, from a combat perspective. However, to take one of your terms, the unbiased media reports mainly headlines such as "freedom-hero(yes, a bit of sarcasm with that term ;-)) bombs checkpoint, 13 marines dead" or "Insurgent attack kills 10, injures 45, including 2 marines."
Like in various local-media entitities, danger/violence sells. Watch your local news programs, particularly if you live in a large metro area. Here the first 5 minutes or so (at least) are filled with headlines such as "Murder in North _____ (not getting my location that easy ;-)) or "serial rapist on the loose downtown", etc. How often do you hear "Teenage boy saves granny from speeding truck"? or "Businessman gives his lunch to homeless man"? etc.
To sum it up, the media is a terrorist's best ally, whether it is complicit or not.
As an American and former Marine; yes!
The source is a marine in iraq crank.
This is symptomatic of one of the major problems I have with Bush, though. If you are going to go to war (rightly or wrongly), have ENOUGH troops to win the war and the peace - quickly.
^But the whinos would bitch and bitch, even though hammering them now would probably lead to less deaths overall than having a dragged out guerilla war.
Parts of it, but not most of it. Bush went out picking a fight and now we're in one. The people battling our soldiers are not the terrorists -- most of them are insurgents. Major difference, although that has become Politically Incorrect to say, back in the States.
I agree that the Marines and other soldiers are targets of opportunity. Once they are not so available, the targeting will decrease dramatically.
This is merely an attempt to make us believe the fighting is for our benefit. It is not. My heart goes out to the soldiers caught up in Bush's Folly ... but that doesn't mean we, back here, are being "protected."
What he is saying is correct, why is the US in Iraq again?
by ABC on Fri Aug 19, 05 11:57am
[+]
That "Marine" certainly writes like a journalist. Amazing coincidence. Do you suppose he learned phrases and words like "Euphrates River battleground," "crucial," "ever more difficult," "even as they mourn," "photogenic chaos," "disheartening,"and "political liabilities" in boot camp?
And, of course, the phrasing is just like an editorial page op ed piece.
Looks like this Marine has a promising career ahead, after the military, in journalism or politics.
Crank, the question is not who said this, or whether you like him. As he is a US soldier I'm sure you wouldn't. No, the question was whether or not you agree with this statement. Robert Byrd (KKK) could have written it, wouldn't matter, the words are right, regardless of who said them.
I think the enemy wants public opinion in the states toward the war to be as negative as possible, and they will do what they can to make that happen.
Whether the words are right or not is subjective isn't it?
by aya on Fri Aug 19, 05 2:40pm
[+]
^ yes, which is why I posed this as a question. But crank so far has refused to answer it.
Marines are trained to think and act to be the most effective weapons.
Whatever this marine says,it doesn't justyfy anything about this war.
I quite agreee with the article/opinion or whatever it was.
I can say I support this opinion because my country is fighting terror as well. and we're donig a great widrawl now. let's see how it goes, although Israel's case is diffrent. for some reason Israel's withrawa in the hipe of their success against terrorism...
"The source is a marine in iraq"
by herzog on Aug 19, 2005 9:51am
They actually let readers and writers into that group of government sanctioned civilian killers?
I guess it could have been dictated but there seems to be a distinct lack of profanity to make it real.
Anyway. The targets are not 'us'. The targets are the invading army that had bludgeoned its way through the country.
Fuck, if an Islamic nation (let's pretend there's one strong enough) strolled into the USA or the UK after bombing the hell out of its civilians just to get some oil and other resources....well I bet you we'd be trying to blow up the invading army.
To the Iraqi people the Marines are not a liberating force of good - they are what they are. A bunch of illiterate blood-hungry apemen c**ts murdering their way through a foreign country for no good reason whatsoever.
i read the first five paragraphs then threw up my breakfast.
This reminds me of the statement in the movie Citizen Kane, where Kane blithely jokes when informed his paper is losing a million dollars a year that "at the rate of a million dollars a year, I'll have to close this place - in sixty years."
Except here it's not dollars, it's America's finest, slaughtered on the Altar of the evil lying scum that are Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney etc.
Remember, this whole war in being waged on the premise of a BIG FAT LIE made up and spouted by the above vermin, namely that there were weapons of mass distraction, there are none and never were and they knew this, so what are American kids doing risking their lives every minute of everyday over there, a million miles away from their families and friends, is this the American dream that they grew up believing in?
|
