#1
Lots easier to control someone who doesn't speak the language or know anyone in the locale to which she has been "imported." These creatures are sorry schmucks...
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
12/22/2006 12:18 Comments ||
Top||
If our media is reporting as fact attacks that never occurred substantiated by witnesses who don't exist, then we have a problem. Public opinion about distant events is necessarily based on what is reported in the press. Therefore, we need to be confident that what we read is real. If we have to look at every source with suspicion and fight over every figure, our country cannot make necessary decisions about this war.
That is not to say that bad things don't happen in Iraq they do. What we need to hear, however, is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth not lies made believable because they fit in with a preconceived "reality of the situation." Our press owes us at least that much.
#1
This is why the Federal Trade Commission should be given the mission without political interference to treat profit making entertainment media subject to the same standards of truth in content as the media has demanded for generations for other money making businesses. The media should be given the opportunity like those businesses to post disclaimer notices that CYA with paper. However, the disclaimer should stipulate that the publishers/producers do not make any claim of authenticity or validity of the information presented.
December 22, 2006: While about three thousand U.S. troops have died in Iraq since 2003, only about 300 have died in Afghanistan, since 2001. That includes 35 percent of the fatalities that were from non-combat causes. Elsewhere in the war on terror (Guantanamo Bay, Djibouti, Eritrea, Jordan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Philippines, Seychelles, Sudan, Tajikistan, Turkey and Yemen) there have been 61 deaths (including four CIA agents) since 2001, but only two of these were the result of hostile action. .
Afghanistan is a very different war, compared to Iraq. For one thing, there are seven times as many American troops in Iraq, and the tempo of combat is heavier as well. But the main difference is fewer troops. There are also fewer hostiles in Afghanistan, and the Taliban are not as well trained as the opposition in Iraq. Most of the mayhem in Iraq is organized and carried out by thousands of secret police veterans of Saddams government. The Taliban were never much more than tribal militias, and remain a primitive and less effective force than their Iraqi counterparts.
The differences between Iraq and Afghanistan, and the growth of Iraqi security forces (police and army) to over 300,000 troops (compared to about 100,000 in Afghanistan, a nation with the same size population), make it seem a reasonable proposition that if the United States just told the Iraqis to take care of Saddam's people themselves and pulled most Americans out, there would be a lot fewer U.S. casualties. The problem with that, and few politicians want to discuss this angle, is that, with American troops gone, the Sunni Arab minority in Iraq would be attacked, and the survivors driven out of the country. This is already happening, in slow motion (about a third of the Sunni Arabs are already dead or in exile). The Sunni Arabs have been earning this kind of retribution for decades, as they slaughtered, starved and tortured the Kurds and Shia Arabs (who comprise 80 percent of the population.) It's one of those things the rest of the world simply condemned, and did nothing about. It's an ugly situation, which would be a lot uglier if there weren't so many American troops in the area.
#1
If anyone needs it, it's the Brits. Read articles on Pg.3 about out of control crime there. Everyone ought to be able to protect themselves and their loved ones. If the government denies this, that government should be changed. After a lot of personal suffering, maybe they'll come to this conclusion also. A couple of the most ardent gun owners I know were previous liberals who favored gun control. One was robbed in her home. The other was mugged and severly beaten in a shopping mall parking garage.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
If our media is reporting as fact attacks that never occurred substantiated by witnesses who don't exist, then we have a problem. Public opinion about distant events is necessarily based on what is reported in the press. Therefore, we need to be confident that what we read is real. If we have to look at every source with suspicion and fight over every figure, our country cannot make necessary decisions about this war.
December 22, 2006: While about three thousand U.S. troops have died in Iraq since 2003, only about 300 have died in Afghanistan, since 2001. That includes 35 percent of the fatalities that were from non-combat causes. Elsewhere in the war on terror (Guantanamo Bay, Djibouti, Eritrea, Jordan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Philippines, Seychelles, Sudan, Tajikistan, Turkey and Yemen) there have been 61 deaths (including four CIA agents) since 2001, but only two of these were the result of hostile action. . 
