Journalism as it should be - The Middle East

Discussion in 'General Global Topics' started by midcan5, Apr 28, 2008.

  1. midcan5
    Offline

    midcan5 liberal / progressive

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    9,492
    Thanks Received:
    1,970
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    Ratings:
    +1,987
    An example of the journalism of old, journalism that is dying in the spin of modern pretend objectivity and a loss of values and historical education. A man who lived there, was in the danger zones, and talked to OBL and others. Excellent.


    "And Churchill’s voice immensely tired and maybe he had a few glasses before he spoke, and you have this extraordinary feeling of power and a man who is using his knowledge of history and imbuing it into other people. What knowledge of history does Bush have? He confused Cambodia with Vietnam. He talks about Vietnam but he managed to avoid going there, as we know Cheney did."

    "...none of the Western leaders have been in war. You see, their knowledge of wars, The Bushes and the Blairs, are from TV, Hollywood Movies. When Churchill committed people to war, he had been in the trenches in WW1. Theodore Roosevelt had direct experience. Eisenhower certainly did, I mean he was Supreme Allied Commander of WW2. So, you had in the post war years, you had Western leadership that knew what war was about: it was about death and screaming and loss and sorrow."

    An Exclusive Interview with Robert Fisk

    By Wajahat Ali

    "There’s a sign of how governments used to behave. Four years before the end of the War, when it looked as if the Germans were going to win, Churchill and the British, alone without any American involvement in the War, he was planning post War Germany. And as British troops moved under fire into the German city of Cologne in 1945, British Civil Servants in flak jackets went with them to take over the Town Hall, because they wanted civil administration to resume immediately. To get the fuel running, get rationing, get the people fed. It worked, and people didn’t die. I mean the Germans were poor and hungry, but they didn’t die. There’s a classic example of how before the age of instant television, news press conferences, spin doctors, etc., people planned for the future and generally it tended to work; by and large, it was successful. That was four years before the end of WW2. Four days before the Americans occupied the center of Baghdad, they didn’t have a coherent plan. They had an odd committee set up in the State Department, but no one listened to it and it had 20 people. So, you’re carried along on this instant decision making: “So, whaddya’ gonna’ do, Mr. Bush? How do you respond to this?” And Bush has had 5 minutes before hand to bone up on what he is going to say."

    http://www.counterpunch.org/waj04262008.html
     
  2. Swamp Fox
    Offline

    Swamp Fox Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    807
    Thanks Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +59
    And Clinton managed to avoid going there as well. And Jimmy Carter served in the Navy and still fucked up everything that came along military wise.

    Churchill was a better leader then George Bush, no question. But was he better because the news was different back then? How would Churchill have handled CNN's War Room coverage of Dunkirk? With CNN beaming photos back of all the equipment left behind on the beach, would Churchill have survived the day in office?

    Kind of hard to compare today versus yesterday because the circumstances were different.
     
  3. midcan5
    Offline

    midcan5 liberal / progressive

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    9,492
    Thanks Received:
    1,970
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    Ratings:
    +1,987
    Swamp, you offer nothing but your personal biases. Bush's decision to attack a sovereign nation that was no threat to US was probably the worst foreign affairs decision of our history. It helps rank him as the worst president in our history according to most historians. Funny how Jimmy Carter gets beat on, our only moral president, who inherited another republican mess, Nixon/Ford's poor performance.
     
  4. AllieBaba
    Offline

    AllieBaba BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    33,778
    Thanks Received:
    3,647
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +3,647
    Well then, things will change with McCain in office.
     
  5. The_Hammer
    Offline

    The_Hammer Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    139
    Thanks Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +15
    I must say it's really compelling to have the chance of a leader who's had actual military experience. Especially McCain. I really want him to just stop pandering to the right and be the man that he's been this whole time.
     
  6. Swamp Fox
    Offline

    Swamp Fox Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    807
    Thanks Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +59
    Let's look at the Dems record. Harry Truman and Korea leap to mind. Then there's JFK and LBJ in Vietnam. Care to show me how either one of them was a threat to the US?

    Jimmy wasn't moral, Jimmy was and is a pussy. If Jimmy had stood up to Iran in 1979, we wouldn't have the problem with them we are having now.
     
  7. Swamp Fox
    Offline

    Swamp Fox Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    807
    Thanks Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +59
    If you wait for a politician to stop pandering, you're in for a loooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnngggggggggggg wait.
     

Share This Page