Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Zimphire · Sep 25, 2003, 06:52 PM

ITERNATIONAL ATLANTA

Media's dark cloud a danger
Falsely bleak reports reduce our chances of success in Iraq

By JIM MARSHALL

On Sept. 14, I flew from Baghdad to Kuwait with
Sgt. Trevor A. Blumberg from Dearborn, Mich. He
was in a body bag. He'd been ambushed and killed
that afternoon. Sitting in the cargo bay of a C 130E,
I found myself wondering whether the news media
were somehow complicit in his death.

News media reports about our progress in Iraq have
been bleak since shortly after the president's premature declaration of victory. These reports contrast sharply with reports of hope and progress presented to Congress by Department of Defense representatives -- a real disconnect, Vietnam d�ja vu. So I went to Iraq with six other members of Congress to see for myself.

The Iraq war has predictably evolved into a guerrilla conflict similar to Vietnam. Our currently stated objectives are to establish reasonable security and foster the creation of a secular, representative
government with a stable market economy that provides broad opportunity throughout Iraqi society.

Attaining these objectives in Iraq would inevitably transform the Arab world and immeasurably increase our future national security.

These are goals worthy of a fight, of sacrifice, of more lives lost now to save thousands, perhaps tens or hundreds of thousands in the
future. In Mosul last Monday, a colonel in the 101st Airborne put it to
me quite simply: "Sir, this is worth doing." No one I spoke with said anything different. And I spoke with all ranks.

But there will be more Blumbergs killed in action, many more. So it is worth doing only if we have a reasonable chance of success. And we
do, but I'm afraid the news media are hurting our chances. They are dwelling upon the mistakes, the ambushes, the soldiers killed, the wounded, the Blumbergs.

Fair enough. But it is not balancing this bad news with "the rest of the story," the progress made daily, the good news. The falsely bleak
picture weakens our national resolve, discourages Iraqi cooperation and emboldens our enemy.

During the conventional part of this conflict, embedded journalists reported the good, the bad and the ugly. Where are the embeds now that
we are in the difficult part of the war, now that fair and balanced
reporting is critically important to our chances of success? At the height of the conventional conflict, Fox News alone had 27 journalists embedded with U.S. troops (out of a total of 774 from all Western media). Today there are only 27 embedded journalists from all media combined.

Throughout Iraq, American soldiers with their typical "can do" attitude and ingenuity are engaging in thousands upon thousands of small
reconstruction projects, working with Iraqi contractors and citizens. Through decentralized decision-making by unit commanders, the 101st Airborne Division alone has spent nearly $23 million in just the past few months. This sum goes a very long way in Iraq. Hundreds upon hundreds of schools are being renovated, repainted, replumbed and reroofed. Imagine the effect that has on children and their parents.

Zogby International recently released the results of an August poll showing hope and progress. My own unscientific surveys told me the same thing. With virtually no exceptions, hundreds of Iraqis enthusiastically waved back at me as I sat in the open door of a helicopter traveling between Babylon and Baghdad. And I received a similar reception as I worked my way alone, shaking hands through a large crowd of refinery workers just to see their reaction.

We may need a few credible Baghdad Bobs to undo the harm done by our media. I'm afraid it is killing our troops.

-- U.S. Rep. Jim Marshall (D-Ga.) of Macon, a Vietnam combat
veteran, is a member of the House Armed Services Committee.

voodoo · Sep 25, 2003, 06:55 PM

more info here:

http://www.hi.is/~palmi/

voodoo · Sep 25, 2003, 06:56 PM

btw what do you mean by: This person is on your Ignore List. To view this post click [here]?

what kind of way is that to start a thread?

Zimphire · Sep 25, 2003, 06:56 PM

Originally posted by voodoo:
more info here:

http://www.hi.is/~palmi/

Well maybe next time you might want to consider posting something in English. This is a primarily English speaking board.

voodoo · Sep 25, 2003, 06:57 PM

But really you are not serious with your original post! Talk about projecting baseless accusations!!

ha ha ha

shmerek · Sep 25, 2003, 06:58 PM

Originally posted by voodoo:
btw what do you mean by: This person is on your Ignore List. To view this post click [here]?

what kind of way is that to start a thread?

+1

voodoo · Sep 25, 2003, 06:59 PM

By the way I hope I have not inconvenienced anyone by posting a link in icelandic

isnt there some bablefish that can translate for the english spaking??

Zimphire · Sep 25, 2003, 07:00 PM

Originally posted by voodoo:
But really you are not serious with your original post! Talk about projecting baseless accusations!!

ha ha ha

Yeah those Democrats are always making things up huh?

voodoo · Sep 25, 2003, 07:00 PM

Originally posted by shmerek:
+1

maybe

thunderous_funker · Sep 25, 2003, 07:02 PM

"My cat can eat a whoooooole watermelon" -- Rubin

voodoo · Sep 25, 2003, 07:02 PM

do one thing: remember that clinton lied more than bush because he was under oath!

but how does the original post (This person is on your Ignore List. To view this post click [here]) have anything to do with soldiers?

Iraq?

voodoo · Sep 25, 2003, 07:04 PM

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
"My cat can eat a whoooooole watermelon" -- Rubin

my cat can eat a lot as well - seriously I think those little guys have the appetite of a medium sized black hole!

shmerek · Sep 25, 2003, 07:04 PM

I was under the assumption that bullets, grenades and other explosives were killing US troops.

Zimphire · Sep 25, 2003, 07:04 PM

Originally posted by voodoo:
do one thing: remember that clinton lied more than bush because he was under oath!

but how does the original post (This person is on your Ignore List. To view this post click [here]) have anything to do with soldiers?

Iraq?

In your knee-jerking did you not even read it? Or who wrote it?

voodoo · Sep 25, 2003, 07:05 PM

Originally posted by shmerek:
I was under the assumption that bullets, grenades and other explosives were killing US troops.

the topic says the media is killing them.

I'd rather believe the topic.

all bow to the topic""

Zimphire · Sep 25, 2003, 07:05 PM

Originally posted by voodoo:
the topic says the media is killing them.

I'd rather believe the topic.

all bow to the topic""

Must be boring in Iceland right about now. You drunk?

I hope so.

voodoo · Sep 25, 2003, 07:06 PM

I think Clinton was far worse than Nixon. You knoe.

voodoo · Sep 25, 2003, 07:08 PM

Well that wraps it up for me tonight! Bedtime!!

I don't see this thread going anywhere anyway (not without my help it seems)

Zimphire · Sep 25, 2003, 07:09 PM

Hey, if you have no desire to talk about the topic, there is no need to act like the village idiot to try to knock it off.

ThinkInsane · Sep 25, 2003, 07:21 PM

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...hreadid=178345

Sorry, couldn't resist

And, I would like to point out, that if Zimphire and his crew derail your threads, my email fills up with reported posts. Lots of them. So, why is it that you guys feel the need to do it to others? Am I the only one that finds this childish? If you have him on ignore, why do you feel the need to click on his post? Or feel the need to tell us all, once again, that you have him on ignore? Or post the same graphic over and over with instructions on how to use the ignore function with a cute little troll graphic? Seems somewhat... unnecessary, in my oh-so-humble opinion. This feels like Junior High lately.