As long as you keep in mind that hearing feel good shit written just to keep the public happy has very little to do with actually achieving anything useful.
It might help if people understood the difference betwee progress and feeling good or bad about some issue.
[quote]vroom wrote:
As long as you keep in mind that hearing feel good shit written just to keep the public happy has very little to do with actually achieving anything useful.[/quote]
But you assume that what is written regarding good news is catoegorically ‘written to keep the public happy’, i.e., written in bad faith to achieve a propagandistic goal rather than reporting progress.
Your assumption is no different than the ones you accuse others of having - partisan and non-objective.
Why wouldn’t you be just as worried about people writing ‘feel bad shit’ written to agitate?
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
But you assume that what is written regarding good news is catoegorically ‘written to keep the public happy’, i.e., written in bad faith to achieve a propagandistic goal rather than reporting progress.
Your assumption is no different than the ones you accuse others of having - partisan and non-objective.
Why wouldn’t you be just as worried about people writing ‘feel bad shit’ written to agitate?[/quote]
Oh FFS, sometimes you are quite trite and annoying.
What I’m saying is that some things represent progress while others do not represent progress, but simply sound like progress.
It is not about your laughable assumption that I assume things are written to keep the public happy, but of course that is what the political spin is sometiems for.
You know the difference between legitimate media reporting and spun entertainment snips shown during talk shows, right?
Quite being such an idiot, or we’ll send you back to the childrens table during dinner time. Adults are trying to talk around here.
[quote]vroom wrote:
It is not about your laughable assumption that I assume things are written to keep the public happy, but of course that is what the political spin is sometiems for.[/quote]
You said it yourself - I was merely trying to get you to clarify your point. Did I respond in a negative tone to your post? Or did I merely posit an observation?
The original news article posted was a Yahoo article, presumably a newswire piece - not a “spin” piece by a talking head.
Now I am going to have to take a few minutes on this one.
Of late, you keep trying to go to the well on this pompous “you’re a lightweight” and “you are out your league” garbage - it is not only tiresome, but everyone around sees straight through it. It’s embarrassing. Do you think anyone here - regardless of political persuasion - thinks such a comment directed by you to me is anything short of silliness?
I was trying to have a conversation, mainly addressing the point that the ‘good news’ that was written here was straight news reporting. Myself and others have tried to converse with you civilly lately, only to get one of your mealy-mouthed “FFS - stop being a myopic idiot” rants as a response on every post. You are like a child in the middle of a several week long tantrum.
Oh, and who is this ‘we’ that will be sending me back to the ‘kids’ table’? Do tell. Here’s a tip: don’t try to talk tough, Vroom - it’s painful to behold and no one is buying it, least of all me.
little irish wrote:
Thanks. I think you are pretty.
No. Guys who give comfort to the enemy in time of war are bad guys.
How exactly would that happen without the sacrifice? Would saddam have stepped down? Were we doing a good job of containing him? Would uday or hussay have been an improvement?
You aren’t evil. However, you are misguided. Let’s work this out. First, nothing you say or do will deter W. from finishing this job. Low poll numbers/little irish’s by the score haven’t deterred him.
Therefore, the least you can do is stop giving bulletin board material to our enemy. You do realize that al qaeda and other bad guys are monitoring the air waves. If you didn’t, please take some time to look up bin laden’s audiotapes from the last year and a half.
He’s listening.
Removing saddam for any reason was noble. Period. If W. would have said that he was invading Iraq because saddam was “lookin’ nappy in those shoes”, it still would have been noble cause.
The copperheads in the North didn’t think we could “subjugate the South by force.” There were guerilla units operating all over the South. irish, you are a modern day copperhead. Defeatist to the core.
This twist has gotten quite old. I’m not asking you to agree with me. I’m not asking you to stop talking. I AM asking you to refrain from your toxic exclamations of defeatism. Think before you type. For instance, if what you say will have no net benefit to the war effort (even give propaganda material for the terrorists) keep it to yourself.
For instance, I think the roadblocks aren’t the best idea in Baghdad. I would prefer that they spend the resources doing house to house sweeps = Good.
George Bush targets civilians for death and torture because all he cares about is being a War President = bad.
I can’t leave you alone, little irish. I want to be near you. “Days, weekends, holidays. I’m going to be with you until the end of time.”
Thanks for asking. No, today we are going to do reps with deadlifts. We are going to resist the urge to do heavy singles. We use rep day to concentrate on the groove. Wish me luck, we are going to do heavy fives.
I’m getting ready to do a powerlifting comp. in August. The rest of the training is going well. Working on cardio. Need to drop 10 pounds to compete in the 242 class. Would rather not go in the 275’s.
However, I’m going to have to break down and shave my quads. I’ve tried using garbage bags to help them slide. It’s not working. The suit is just too damned hard to get on. I’m having to hang from the power rack by the straps.
I’ve resisted shaving any part of my legs.
I’ll let you know how things are progressing.
I appreciate the interest.
Thanks.
JeffR
pox wrote:
Hey, pox. Welcome back!!! How did the eating competition go? Did you make glutton class?
If yes, would you please post a pic of your gold-laced, bib?
I appreciate your interest in my lifting. I just posted an update for you to peruse.
Thanks.
JeffR
While I understand that those of you who support the war are happy to hear news that it is not all in vain, I don?t think there are “winners” and “losers” in war. (I know, I know. I?m some dumb pinko hippy communist tree-hugging idealist left-wing liberal degenerate fuck-pig.)
It?s not your local team playing a match agaisnt their rivals.
(I suppose the only “winners” in war are those who profit from it.)
I don?t understand how so many of the vehement Christians promote war, wish all forms of evil on their enemy (who is anyone who opposes them), and cheer to sounds of pain and suffering. That is not the way of Christ. Do you really think Jesus would abandon his message ?to get things done?? Do you really think Jesus would say that the ends justify the means?
I don?t understand why people think that because there is a different president there must be a different agenda. They all look the same to me, apart from the whole “conservative” vs. “liberal” mascarade.
I don?t understand why “liberals” think that Clinton was a saint! He was just as crooked as Bush and his administration, only better at hiding it.
Thunder, when you can disconnect yourself from the first post, and read my original comment on it’s own, and respond to the point it is truly raising, then you will have something worth saying.
Like it or not, your comment was just silly. You got a silly comment back in kind. Boo hoo.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
pox wrote:
LOL. I refuse to believe that Jefferriffy works out at all. That means the only squatting going on involves a subsequent flush.
Hey, pox. Welcome back!!! How did the eating competition go? Did you make glutton class?
If yes, would you please post a pic of your gold-laced, bib?
I appreciate your interest in my lifting. I just posted an update for you to peruse.
Thanks.
JeffR
[/quote]
Oh, I am very interested. Your health is a top priority in my mind. Tell me, are people able to tell you lift by looking at you? I mean, you put so much thought into my eating practices. Surely someone as “well trained” as yourself has their diet locked down as well, right? I’m looking for that update and can’t find it. Could you post directions to it?
Yours in love, Professor X
Back on topic.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002690071
The Washington Post has obtained a cable, marked “sensitive,” that it says shows that just before President Bush left on a surprise trip last Monday to the Green Zone in Baghdad for an upbeat assessment of the situation there, “the U.S. Embassy in Iraq painted a starkly different portrait of increasing danger and hardship faced by its Iraqi employees.”
This cable outlines, the Post reported Sunday, “the daily-worsening conditions for those who live outside the heavily guarded international zone: harassment, threats and the employees’ constant fears that their neighbors will discover they work for the U.S. government.”
It’s actually far worse than that, as the details published below indicate, which include references to abductions, threats to women’s rights, and “ethnic cleansing.”
…
[quote]vroom wrote:
Thunder, when you can disconnect yourself from the first post, and read my original comment on it’s own, and respond to the point it is truly raising, then you will have something worth saying.[/quote]
I read your original comment on its own, and didn’t dismiss it - I raised a question about it. You responded to my post and then I responded back. That is it - no more, no less. Then you threw a sniveling hissy fit, which, I should not have been surprised by.
Nonsense. It was just a clarifying point - and it wasn’t insulting or inflammatory. But it was met with your predictable shrill crybabying and pathetic attempts to sound tough, and I should have seen it coming.
Back to the topic.
[quote]semper_fi wrote:
How long do you think it will be before its over? I’m going to join the Marines as soon as I finish high school and I really hope to catch some action before its all over.[/quote]
This “War on Terrorism” won’t be over anytime soon. Besides, you don’t want to go to Iraq now anyways. There is nothing going on there. You want to see action? Go to D.C. Fact of the matter is that if you become a grunt in the corps you won’t see any action. If you want to see action be a cook in the Alaska National Guard. Being a grunt gets you firewatch on base if you are even lucky enough to get sent into a combat zone. (Yeah I am a little bitter at 5 years of doing shit in the grunts while all the pogues got to fight.)
Honestly though, Iraq is way too chill anyways. You won’t see any action. The only action you might see is getting blown up by an IED while you are scratching your balls on a convoy. The “Forever War on Terror” is going to do nothing but work us closer to a police state. Buy a rifle now and get thee to a range in case you are truly needed to shrug off the federal government in what may be the next American Revolution. If you really feel the need to fight for freedom then you are already on the front lines devil.
Mike
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
I read your original comment on its own, and didn’t dismiss it - I raised a question about it. You responded to my post and then I responded back. That is it - no more, no less. Then you threw a sniveling hissy fit, which, I should not have been surprised by.
Nonsense. It was just a clarifying point - and it wasn’t insulting or inflammatory. But it was met with your predictable shrill crybabying and pathetic attempts to sound tough, and I should have seen it coming.
Back to the topic. [/quote]
LOL. Dream on bub.
I’m not the guy around here that tries to play tough. Neither I might add are you.
Zzzzz. Wake me if you actually have anything to say.
[quote]Wreckless wrote:
Back on topic.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002690071
The Washington Post has obtained a cable, marked “sensitive,” that it says shows that just before President Bush left on a surprise trip last Monday to the Green Zone in Baghdad for an upbeat assessment of the situation there, “the U.S. Embassy in Iraq painted a starkly different portrait of increasing danger and hardship faced by its Iraqi employees.”
This cable outlines, the Post reported Sunday, “the daily-worsening conditions for those who live outside the heavily guarded international zone: harassment, threats and the employees’ constant fears that their neighbors will discover they work for the U.S. government.”
It’s actually far worse than that, as the details published below indicate, which include references to abductions, threats to women’s rights, and “ethnic cleansing.”
…[/quote]
I rarely agree with Wreckless, but everyone reading this thread should check out the link he mentioned, to the U.S. embassy’s appraisal of how life in Baghdad outside the Green Zone really is:
Read that and then try trumpeting that we’re “Winning in Iraq!!!” I hope we are, but try reading some of the Iraqi blogs, like Iraq the Model or Healing Iraq, and then compare them to idiots’ chorus at places like the Belmont Club. Who do you think has a better idea of what’s actually going on over there?
gdol,
First, I’d like you to think twice before publically agreeing with anything reckless has to say. He is a toxic Anti-American. If you doubt me, please search his/her posts.
It’s pretty sickening.
Now, here is what Tony Snow said about that report on wolfbliter’s situation room:
“That’s taken in mid-May. Here we are, we’re a month later and I’ve just told you you’ve got 50,000 Iraqi troops that are now focusing on those problem areas in Baghdad. What’s interesting is – hand me that for a second. Because there was an interesting lead on this story where it was said, “Hours before President Bush left on a surprise trip for an upbeat assessment of the situation?” He didn’t go there for an upbeat assessment of the situation. He went there for a realistic assessment. And he got it from the prime minister, and he got it from the electricity minister and the oil minister and the minister for human rights and the minister for national reconciliation. So this was not the president trying to do a victory lap, no, it was the president now realizing you’ve got somebody you can work with to deal with problems like this”
Maliki and a fully functioning government is the key. It is the glue that will keep the three sections together. It is a legitimately elected Democratic representative government that put’s the lie to all those clowns who said it couldn’t happen.
That is winning.
If you don’t think that this government and the 400+ raids, killing and capturing of 104 terrorists, and killing of zarqawi isn’t “winning,” then I cannot convince you.
JeffR
[quote]JeffR wrote:
gdol,
First, I’d like you to think twice before publically agreeing with anything reckless has to say. He is a toxic Anti-American. If you doubt me, please search his/her posts.
It’s pretty sickening.
Now, here is what Tony Snow said about that report on wolfbliter’s situation room:
“That’s taken in mid-May. Here we are, we’re a month later and I’ve just told you you’ve got 50,000 Iraqi troops that are now focusing on those problem areas in Baghdad. What’s interesting is – hand me that for a second. Because there was an interesting lead on this story where it was said, “Hours before President Bush left on a surprise trip for an upbeat assessment of the situation?” He didn’t go there for an upbeat assessment of the situation. He went there for a realistic assessment. And he got it from the prime minister, and he got it from the electricity minister and the oil minister and the minister for human rights and the minister for national reconciliation. So this was not the president trying to do a victory lap, no, it was the president now realizing you’ve got somebody you can work with to deal with problems like this”
Maliki and a fully functioning government is the key. It is the glue that will keep the three sections together. It is a legitimately elected Democratic representative government that put’s the lie to all those clowns who said it couldn’t happen.
That is winning.
If you don’t think that this government and the 400+ raids, killing and capturing of 104 terrorists, and killing of zarqawi isn’t “winning,” then I cannot convince you.
JeffR[/quote]
Good post Jeff.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
gdol,
First, I’d like you to think twice before publically agreeing with anything reckless has to say. He is a toxic Anti-American. If you doubt me, please search his/her posts.
[/quote]
Looks that way. But I’m not going to dismiss everything someone says because of his biases. Even JustTheFacts, reliable little anti-Semite that he is, provides a good link every once in a great while.
OK. Not sure how much this changes the situation in Iraq…
Agree 100%.
The killing of Zarqawi is great news, but body counts mean nothing in a war like this, and can even be indicative of losing more than winning. Read about Vietnam, Malaya, Algeria, or any other counter-insurgency campaign sometime, instead of dwelling on half-baked World War II analogies. You win by providing security, not by annihilating the enemy, and that is something we have not done.
So, Tony Snowjob says it’s been a month, and the main propaganda arm of the White House should be taken as gospel?
No, never mind various other departments are not as intent on spinning things, but give honest assessments.
Guys, if you want to believe in the tooth fairy, go ahead, but please try to figure out where the news actually comes from and where it doesn’t.
It doesn’t come from the spokesmouth of the White House, well, it rarely does. The White House delivers a “take” on the news.
Lunacy prevails!
More good news! A whole new way to deconstruct and reconstruct…and stabalize!
gdol wrote:
Can’t go there with you. Perhaps you read the report intercepted from al qaeda? Don’t worry, I posted it to start this thread.
Killing, choking off finances, storming safehouses, and generally making it harder for the bad guys to work their mischief DOES MEAN something.
First of all, in our previous discussion, you flew off the handle and made many unfounded assumptions. I asked you to explain your position further. You then went on a “I’ve read X books and therefore am a expert” tirade. You assumed that I was ignorant of history. You dismissed my points as irrelevant because I didn’t reference your favorites at the local library.
I let it pass. Not because I have any doubt as to my erudition. It trully wasn’t worth my effort to change your mind. Further, I’m uncomfortable “name dropping.” However, since that seems to be the way you define informed, I’ll play a little.
Here’s the source that I think sums up my feelings the best:
www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/milreview/sepp.pdf
If you take the time to read this, you will find that the Administration, Coalition, and the Iraqi’s have adopted many of it’s precepts.
In summary, the Good Guys are winning.
JeffR