News or Propaganda

How do you all feel about the news coverage??? Are we being shown a realistic appraisal of the situation in Iraq or are we just being drawn into the Coalition propaganda machine?

I personally am very skeptical of all stories and believe that the real truth may never be heard. But i am not surprised at the level of resistance, if fact I wouldnt be surprised if the resistance stiffened as they prepare to defend urban areas and deny the coalition forces there much vaunted air supremacy.

 

I feel the same way about the media. Seems to me that they only let people see if it shows Iraqi POW's or deads or marching troops and tanks.

I could be wrong, but I'm glad that sometimes on the Belgian television they show as images from CNN/BBC and Al Jazeera.

They both do propaganda, but by seeing the two sides of propaganda, you can milimalise that.

 

I think that it comes from the Vietnam experience of the U.S. with the fear that body bags and our wounded and dead will obviously affect public opinion and may well be enough to bring down governments

 

seems everyone has an expert opinion on the many threads on FFZ. Why don't we just sit tight and wait to see what happenss in Baghdad the weeks to come. The rolling stock of the Coalition is proceeding in most hurried fashion which does not at all seem normal to us TV and media watchers.
Remember we are only seeing and hearing about 1/16th of what really is going on. Amazing how many conclusions have already been drawn by the board members......

 

I totally agree. The 'history ' of the operation will have to be debated after the events. I am merely suggesting conjecture and possible scenarios. I just feel that it could, and I mean could, lead to something far bigger than we realise... But then maybe I inject too much history into my thoughts on the conflict and am probally way off target... Bit like a scud really

 

My statements Red were for the prolific writers on the FFZ. As to another Stalingrad or Berlin I am sure the Coalition forces hierarchy have thought of this. The DF and S/O boyz inside Baghdad are watching very closely what is going on with Iraqui troop movements within and just outside the city....

 

.

[ 27. March 2004, 04:52 PM: Message edited by: C.Evans ]

 

Carl: More suicides at Guantanamo Bay as well as "death by blunt trauma" being reported. Reports I have read sound rather grisly.
Respectfully submitted,
Knight

 

Carl, I rather be not a POW at all.

But if I had to choose, than rathe a POW from the Brittish and Americans than from the Iraqi's.

Although I think that they will both treat POW's well.

 

Seems to me that the US has invented something again. The US accuses Russia from delivering weapons to Iras, although the US knew this already for a year.

Putin denies Russian arms sales to Iraq
'Groundless' allegations can only hurt relations, he tells Bush
From Jill Dougherty
CNN Moscow Bureau
Tuesday, March 25, 2003 Posted: 5:52 AM EST (1052 GMT)

MOSCOW, Russia (CNN) -- Russian President Vladimir Putin has told President Bush that Russian companies are not supplying sensitive military equipment to Iraq.

Putin made the denial in a telephone conversation Monday evening. He told Bush that the allegations can only harm relations between the two countries.

The United States accuses privately owned Russian companies of supplying Iraq with antitank missiles, night-vision goggles and radio-jamming equipment that can interfere with planes and bombs.

The White House said it has received reports that a Russian company that produces jamming equipment has been aiding Iraqi military forces, possibly including sending Russian technicians to Iraq.

According to a statement, Putin told Bush that the allegations are "groundless." He stressed that Russia takes such concerns seriously and has said many times that no such aid is taking place.

One Russian company, KBP Tula, accused by the U.S. State Department of supplying Iraq with "Kornet" antitank missiles, said such sales could not have taken place because sales to other countries are "under strict Russian government control.

"The possibility of signing any nonapproved contracts or, what's more, supplying [such equipment] is entirely excluded," the company said.

KBP Tula said it has "never in all the time it's been working broken any international agreements or treaties."

The company suggested that the United States is raising the subject in an attempt to "justify the failure of U.S. armed forces in the first stage of military action in Iraq" and is trying to "complicate the KBP's supplying armaments which exceed the quality of U.S. arms."

"We do agree that the Kornet missile is able to successfully oppose any tanks or motorized infantry divisions," the company added, "but if they were in Iraq in any quantity, then the U.S. infantry would be taking greater losses than they are now."


http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/03/25/sprj.irq.russia.putin/index.html

 

The conspiracy people believe that once we've secured the Middle East (whenever that may be...) we're going to start pumping oil and natural gas out of the Caspian Sea--which will bring us into conflict with the Russian states. Better to start conflicts with them now-over issues not involving oil-which will give us an excuse later on for taking their natural resources.
I don't necessarily subscribe to this, but it is an idea. I mean... can Bush wreck relations with Europe and Russia any faster than he is now?
What's he doing?

 

Erich, with all due respect, they didn't seem to think the Iraqis would attack exposed supply lines and hense they are coming under attack. They also thought that Bazra, Umm Qasr, Nasira and so on would all capitulate instantly and that none of the Iraqis would fight determindly for their homes. They appear not to have realised that as a defeated nation the Iraqis would use any method to fight back, including geurilla warfare. As this war goes on I get more and more dubious of the tactical skill of the military leaders, they appear to be lacking in knowledge of history or the appropriate allocation of units to tasks (e.g. sending an armoured brigade into a town to clear it). The other thing that worries me is how many predictions I have heared made (or made myself) have come true (R.E. a post made either here or on another forum, I forget, saying that the Iraqis would leave the desert, head back into towns and conduct street fighting, then when the US soldiers could not force them out of the towns British troops would be called in because of their superior training and experience - no disrespect to US troops but thanks to Northern Ireland FIBUA is bread and butter to some British units). Actually DF and spec.ops blokes watching troop movements, well I know the SAS have been in Baghdad for 2 months before the war started, its fairly well known actually, the problem is that the troops can very easily look like civilians, troop movements become difficult to watch when you have armed crowds moving through streets or militia and geurilla fighters who dress like civilians. I agree with what you said though about waiting and seeing, I can only hope I am prooved wrong as I heared an ex-US General (who served in 1991) predict over 3000 casualties. We can but wait.

 

Stefen :

I think we have to ask ourselves how old are our boys that are in combat ? Not the officers in upper eschelon. The regular combat soldier has not seen any combat before and although giving their best shot with the high tech gear, they are still unfamiliar with the terrain, sand storms and Iraqui tactics of hit and run. The big boyz should have been aware of this but again I mention that we know practically nothing of what is really happening except for the tidbits the media presents to us and thus therefore we make our judgemental opinions

 

small notation......

pockets of resistance, how do you deal with it. civilians or no they will probably be obliterated by air ops including Baghdad. Will the US president concede to this......time will tell....
will the SAS, DF and Special ops boyz poke Saddam and his military cabinet ? ......will the Republican guard be able to retreat into the city for the last defence or will they be extinquished on the battlefield.......

 

As for the age issue, well I am not sure about that, I know several guys who have gone to Iraq and of them are combat veterans, one fought in the last gulf war (he was a Marine at the time and so only got in right at the end). As for our troops not being ready for it, well thanks to Northern Ireland British troops tend to be relativley experienced in urban tactics (at least in some units), many of the NCO's and Officers are veterans of previous campaigns and peace keeping operations (e.g. Kosovo and so on). Terrain etc, I read that some of the British troops who are in Iraq have trained in Oman, I know for a fact that the SAS play there as do the Marines from time to time. The high tech aspect of it is a problem, I was talking to a friend who used to be a Sergent in the British army, he was saying that frankly he sees reliance on technology as being a huge problem, when he left the army they were just introducing night vision etc and he commented that he felt that it was simply taking away peoples ability to rely on their own vision (which can often be better at night, particularly in combat situations). His other comment was 'technology is all very well, but it all comes down to a man with a pointy stick in the end and we must not let reliance on technology take anything away from ourselves', i.e. its all very well but there are some things that an infantryman will always need and we can not let technology reduce his basic skills.

 

.

[ 27. March 2004, 04:53 PM: Message edited by: C.Evans ]

 

They didn't tried it in the first to assassin Sadam, why would they do it now?

Probably the Republican guard will fight as long as possible for the gates of Baghdad and when nothing stops the US/Brittish troop, then they will retreat into the city and will try to make Bagdad into a second Stalingrad.

 

[ 16. September 2003, 10:03 PM: Message edited by: Crapgame ]

 

I've been thnking along similar lines to this. But i think the BBC is reacting to the views of many people. The same problem is happening wiyth he deaths of civilians. A handful die in a market place and there is uproar. But compare that to say, Dresdan, and it is no comparison.

As sad as every death is, this is war. But i think part of the problem is that the powers that be have stressed the technlogy so much, that many believe these things cannot happen anymore,so when they do,there is uproar.

As for the troops, well, thats our job. Thats what we get paid for. Harsh i know, but very true.

 

Sadly to say that the US bombs the builidings of the Iraqi television station. What a pitty! Like CNN, BBC, ... don't spoil propaganda in this war.

I thought freedom of opinion was so important to the US and the Brittish.