|
|
Post by Vagrant on Oct 29, 2004 12:58:24 GMT -5
Saw that on one of those blurbs at the bottom of the screen on CNN Headline News (you know, the Communist News Network.)
100,000 Dead Iraqis in Iraq according to recent estimates; many are women and children.
Now this is what many of us are talking about when we say liberal media bias I hope the libs are paying attention because I'm about to break this sentence down elementary school style.
Ok 100,000 Iraqis dead? Horrible right? Well lets take a look at this. Were they all civilians? Were they all killed after or during the start of the war?
Recent estimates; they don't site where they got these estimates. Where did they get these facts? I'm more interested in that.
Many are women and children; here's the kicker. Most people only process the first and last things in a speech or in the things they read, especially short little tidbits. So the average reader sees the the 100,000 dead and then 'women and children'. Leaving the impression that our military is a bunch of undisciplined idiots shooting anything that moves.
Hell even the word 'many' is misleading. Even 1 woman or child I consider as 'too many'. But what is the ratio of women and children, to combantant or jackass that is shooting at us?
Do I have any takers?
|
|
|
|
Post by Cheneysmyhero on Nov 9, 2004 17:57:32 GMT -5
I don't doubt our soldiers abilities one bit. I doubt the decision to drop large bombs on a city of 5 million people. I am sorry, but I don't think dropping a bunker buster on a hotel because you think Saddam's sons are in the basement is a real good idea.
While I believe the estimates come from the Red Cross, I will play your game. Let's just say the number is only 50,000 Iraqi civilens dead. Let's say 10% are woman and children (I have the pictures of babies that got caught in a building our commanding officers decided to bomb and I know we have killed some babies. Part of war I know.), is that really any better? 50,000 people dead because we wanted to free them? Again, don't take this as an attack on our soldiers, I respect each and every one of them for what they have done, I question the motives for the war and have since day one. I watched Bush declare war on Iraq and said "what is this hucklebuck doing? We can't just go and attack a sovereign country because we don't like their policies. It doesn't work that way." Iraq was never a threat to America.
|
|
|
|
Post by Malebolgia on Nov 9, 2004 19:30:21 GMT -5
I don't doubt our soldiers abilities one bit. I doubt the decision to drop large bombs on a city of 5 million people. I am sorry, but I don't think dropping a bunker buster on a hotel because you think Saddam's sons are in the basement is a real good idea. While I believe the estimates come from the Red Cross, I will play your game. Let's just say the number is only 50,000 Iraqi civilens dead. Let's say 10% are woman and children (I have the pictures of babies that got caught in a building our commanding officers decided to bomb and I know we have killed some babies. Part of war I know.), is that really any better? 50,000 people dead because we wanted to free them? Again, don't take this as an attack on our soldiers, I respect each and every one of them for what they have done, I question the motives for the war and have since day one. I watched Bush declare war on Iraq and said "what is this hucklebuck doing? We can't just go and attack a sovereign country because we don't like their policies. It doesn't work that way." Iraq was never a threat to America. This hucklebucks got his head on straight, or maybe a hair to the left. (zinG!) |
|
|
|
Post by Vagrant on Nov 10, 2004 9:06:27 GMT -5
My point was that CNN was putting out deliberatly misleading information. Or at least put it out in such a way as to invite misinterpretation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Malebolgia on Nov 10, 2004 17:52:23 GMT -5
My point was that CNN was putting out deliberatly misleading information. Or at least put it out in such a way as to invite misinterpretation. Thank God Fox News hasn't stumbled upon this practice. *Whoops* |
|
|
|
Post by Vagrant on Nov 10, 2004 17:55:45 GMT -5
Please keep all smart-butt comments to the issue at hand.
|
|
|
|
Post by ProChildren on Nov 11, 2004 10:21:09 GMT -5
Thank God Fox News hasn't stumbled upon this practice. *Whoops* Fox news is ok because the head of it is republican and my people never lie |
|
|
|
Post by Malebolgia on Nov 11, 2004 12:53:06 GMT -5
Please keep all smart-butt comments to the issue at hand. It was! |
|
|
|
Post by Cheneysmyhero on Nov 11, 2004 18:47:53 GMT -5
My point was that CNN was putting out deliberatly misleading information. Or at least put it out in such a way as to invite misinterpretation. Deliberately misleading? How so? By reporting the news in Iraq? Oh, wait, it wasn't presented the way you wanted it so it is wrong. How should they have written it? How about "Estimates indicate close to 100,000 Iraqi civilens have lost their lives in this war. " Or as I am sure FNC would have reported it: All hail George W. Bush. If you don't vote for him the terrorists will get ya. |
|
