Hitler and his bad timing

aproy1101 said:
I also think Americans have gotten more sensitive to battle casualties, and their stomach for loss has gotten queasier.

Soupah, you call that a jibe...........

Edited.
Click to expand...

Certainly they're less willing to serve in the military. :jerkit: I'm pretty sensitive to battle casualties and have hardly any stomach for loss. I guess that makes me a wimpy American. Sorry Andy, couldn't resist. I guess I find I disagree with what you've written more than the average poster. No big deal. Doesn't mean your opinions aren't valid.
 
I supported the war in Afghanistan but not Iraq.

I think the media was complicit in simply repeating the administrations claims of WMD without doing the hard work of investigative journalisim that would have shifted public opinion, and I think today as they begin to actually cover the war they are still holding back and not showing us the full picture. Not due to pro military bias, but simply because the situation is too dangerous to report on.

I saw a reporter address this on a show and they said, I'll try to quote: "They tell us we dont' report the good things, but there's not that many good things. Also don't ask me to send my people out and risk getting killed or kidnapped in order to cover the rebuilding of a school that you bombed a year earlier":eek:

My house is very old. Many rooms were "wallpapered" with Newspaper. The stuff from 1940 shows that resistance to us getting into the war was very strong. I saved an editorial dated 1940 that was a letter from the editor of Progressive Farmer magazine urging FDR to avoid getting involved in the war. It wasn't till Pearl Harbor that public opinion shifted.

It is possible to pull the wool over peoples eyes but not forever in a country with a free press.
 
soupah said:
Certainly they're less willing to serve in the military. :jerkit: I'm pretty sensitive to battle casualties and have hardly any stomach for loss. I guess that makes me a wimpy American. Sorry Andy, couldn't resist. I guess I find I disagree with what you've written more than the average poster. No big deal. Doesn't mean your opinions aren't valid.
Click to expand...

Well you certainly haven't resisted personal attacks much. I'll give you that.


Edited.....You also seem to like that jerkit smiley. That doesn't reflect positively on you at all.
 
aproy1101 said:
Well you certainly haven't resisted personal attacks much. I'll give you that.
Click to expand...

And neither have you, in your own obtuse way. I'll let you get the last word on this, if you wish. I'm done with it.
 
Guys...geez...do you have *any* idea how hard it is to sit here with a delete button and not use it?

Dang...surf on over to Urbandead and work those hosilities out there...will ya?

Barring that, take it over to Whine & Cheese and at least get it over with.
 
Nasty his personal attacks on me started yesterday. Munk called him on it and he apologized... to Munk. And now to you. However, I'm obtuse.
 
That's what Ignore is for. It avoids conversation with people who annoy more than they enlighten you.
 
Esav Benyamin said:
That's what Ignore is for. It avoids conversation with people who annoy more than they enlighten you.
Click to expand...

You're right. I've just never put anyone on it yet. I'd hate to start with Soupah, with whom I've had a good relationship till yesterday. A vet too. I'd hate to start it that way.
 
I'm really not suggesting any one person (or I'd provide a link to "Put so-and-so on your Ignore list") But it's an option to consider. Even if they're on Ignore, there's a link to hit to read a specific post that might be OK, and you can easily remove them once you've gotten past the hard feelings.

But what happens when two people begin to grate on each other is, it gets way out of hand before either of the two realize it. Better to back off completely until the rancor goes away.
 
Esav Benyamin said:
But what happens when two people begin to grate on each other is, it gets way out of hand before either of the two realize it. Better to back off completely until the rancor goes away.
Click to expand...

Exactly people will even try to get digs at each other in totally unrelated threads and even stalk each other on difft forums.

I think the impulse is to be the person to get the last word in but we discuss this stuff over and over so it's really just an illusion.
 
All subject to $.02 rule:


hollowdweller said:
I supported the war in Afghanistan but not Iraq.

I think the media was complicit in simply repeating the administrations claims of WMD without doing the hard work of investigative journalisim that would have shifted public opinion, and I think today as they begin to actually cover the war they are still holding back and not showing us the full picture. Not due to pro military bias, but simply because the situation is too dangerous to report on.
Click to expand...

I have heard, including on BBC World Service radio, that all major western interlligence organizations, including French and Russian, believed that Irag had nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. I suppose that an enterprising reporter might have done better, but it seems unlikely, no?

I saw a reporter address this on a show and they said, I'll try to quote: "They tell us we dont' report the good things, but there's not that many good things. Also don't ask me to send my people out and risk getting killed or kidnapped in order to cover the rebuilding of a school that you bombed a year earlier":eek:
Click to expand...

BBC, which is pretty clearly anti-war, reports "good" things. For one thing, they regularly report the casualties on the "other" side. From watching main U.S. TV, it would seem that only the other side can shoot straight - unless killing civilians, of course. (That may have changed in the last couple of weeks.) Local stations in Ohio have reporters in iraq who regualrly report "good" things - like building schools - on local news shows.

My house is very old. Many rooms were "wallpapered" with Newspaper. The stuff from 1940 shows that resistance to us getting into the war was very strong. I saved an editorial dated 1940 that was a letter from the editor of Progressive Farmer magazine urging FDR to avoid getting involved in the war. It wasn't till Pearl Harbor that public opinion shifted.
Click to expand...

Yes; we were too good to fight overseas. Now, it seems we are too evil to be trusted to fight overseas.

It is possible to pull the wool over peoples eyes but not forever in a country with a free press.
Click to expand...

As CBS discovered. There is a free press - on the Internet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top