Al_Pine Posted November 10, 2003 Posted November 10, 2003 From those liberal bastards at the AP: "As of Monday, Nov. 10, 394 U.S. service members have died since the beginning of military operations in Iraq, according to the Department of Defense. The British military has reported 52 deaths; Denmark, Spain, Ukraine and Poland reported one each." Every day, every-frickin' day they assault us with the number of Americans dead in Iraq. At least twice a week we get to learn how many British have been killed. Last week when a polish soldier was killed it was front page news. But never....NEVER, or at least hardly ever, they report how many Iraqi's we have killed!!! We need some fucking balance in the reporting. If they're always gonna report how many of our boys n girls have lost their lives in Iraq they should at least balance that out with how many we've taken down with us! Damn straight. Quote
ScottP Posted November 10, 2003 Posted November 10, 2003 If the US military were to return to the body counts like those of the Vietnam era, that will mean taking responsibility for the killing. If the US military have no record of the deaths exacted, it deters viewing what is happening as inhumane and irrational. The US military should be made to recognize the humanity of the victims of this war by making a permanant, historical record of what is being done rather than just erasing them from existence. Quote
bird Posted November 10, 2003 Posted November 10, 2003 This would be a difficult number to determine. The US military meticulously keeps track of soldiers, whereas this is not the case for Iraqi military and citizens. We still have only estimates for the 1991 Gulf War- 30,000- 205,000 combined military and civillian deaths depending if you are asking the U.S. military or Greepeace. Quote
Ratboy Posted November 11, 2003 Posted November 11, 2003 If people are being killed or injured because of our military exertions, then the American people have a right to know the numbers. Reporting should be mandatory and public. Public relations be damned. Quote
Peter_Puget Posted November 11, 2003 Posted November 11, 2003 Bravo Al you're starting to get it! What is confusing you is liberal v other kinds of bias. Because virtually all the bias you see is infact liberal bias you are assuming here that the AP's bias is liberal. Not so. But keep up the good work. PP Quote
Jim Posted November 11, 2003 Posted November 11, 2003 PP - you crack me up! Just look at how the supposedly liberal media ripped the Regan mini-series from the tube under conservative pressure, how Sixty Minutes canceled segments on the tobacco industry and on the nuclear industry due to industry pressure. There is no liberal media bias because there is no liberal media in this country. OK - maybe Z Magazine with it's circulation of 10,000. Hell, PBS and NPR have canceled numerous shows on prisioner rights, AIDS, and Gay issues when the conservative and religious right came calling. Liberal bias, what a joke! Quote
bunglehead Posted November 11, 2003 Posted November 11, 2003 Jim said: PP - you crack me up! Just look at how the supposedly liberal media ripped the Regan mini-series from the tube under conservative pressure, how Sixty Minutes canceled segments on the tobacco industry and on the nuclear industry due to industry pressure. There is no liberal media bias because there is no liberal media in this country. OK - maybe Z Magazine with it's circulation of 10,000. Hell, PBS and NPR have canceled numerous shows on prisioner rights, AIDS, and Gay issues when the conservative and religious right came calling. Liberal bias, what a joke! Agreed. Quote
j_b Posted November 11, 2003 Posted November 11, 2003 i can't tell if al_pine is being sarcastic. anyhow not reporting how many iraqi soldiers and civilians are victims of 'precision' bombing and other 'collateral damage' is hardly liberal. as a matter of fact, the only press that bothers with these numbers is the alternative press. http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ Quote
Fairweather Posted November 11, 2003 Posted November 11, 2003 ...and who killed the conservative "Dr. Laura"? Quote
schlangeschmecker Posted November 11, 2003 Posted November 11, 2003 Fairweather said: ...and who killed the conservative "Dr. Laura"? Once we saw her naked, she just seemed to lose her charm. She's a victim of her big mouth and her eagerness to prescribe moral standards by which she feels personally unrestrained. Quote
schlangeschmecker Posted November 11, 2003 Posted November 11, 2003 Fairweather said: I zink u mizzed za point, ya? \ Oh no. I didn't miss za point. I saw the other one too. Maybe it's just me, but I have difficulty tuning in to an a.m. radio family counselor who has appeared in photographs I wouldn't let my kids view. Quote
Peter_Puget Posted November 11, 2003 Posted November 11, 2003 Check out this link . Esp the last paragraph. Ok AL maybe you were right about the liberal bias. PP Quote
Al_Pine Posted November 11, 2003 Author Posted November 11, 2003 Right on. That piece is a step in the right direction (no pun intended), but there's still no Iraqi body count there. Just a bunch of general "attacks were responded to" stuff. No shit we responded to the attacks. I still want them to let us know how many pounds of flesh we are extracting. Quote
Ursa_Eagle Posted November 11, 2003 Posted November 11, 2003 Peter_Puget said: Check out this link . Esp the last paragraph. Ok AL maybe you were right about the liberal bias. PP A link from "opinionjournal"? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.