Blair blames media for anti-war mood

[CurrentAffairs]

Independent Online Edition > UK Politics

 

[WMDLIAR]

If this doesn't tell you that Blair is dirty nothing will. It's all about the oil and how to best exploit it. I just wish they had been honest about it.

 

[cherokee]

If this doesn't tell you that Blair is dirty nothing will. It's all about the oil and how to best exploit it. I just wish they had been honest about it.

And just where did it say that?

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Wow, he makes himself out to be pretty ignorant with that message..

Blair blames the media when it is his own fault.. Great.:doh

 

[SixStringHero]

So where is all this so called OIL that we went to war for?

I haven't seen a drop.

 

[RightOfCenter]

Yeah, where is it? I'm still expecting $.95 a gallon prices...

 

[jamesrage]

Independent Online Edition > UK Politics

I think Blair is correct in the assumption that the media is to blame for the anti-war mood.IF the media did the same crap in WWII we would have got asses handed to us.Because the hell is the public supposed to think when the only thing the media shows is "soldiers died in Iraq today","a suicide bomber or gun man shoot or killed a bunch of people in the market today" or "inmates were forced to stand a naked human pyramid at abu-grab-an-arab prison".The media doesn't tell us the death toll of the terrorist and insurgents,the media doesn't tell us what marines and soldiers received high awards,the media doesn't tell us how many hospitals coalition troops built,how many Iraqis citizens have coalition troops helped out in community projects.The reason why the media only shows us the bad stuff and not the good is because they want this anti-war sentiment.

You can not honestly tell me that if the media only showed the good coalition forces are doing and how many terrorist/insurgents our troops have killed that the anti-war mood would be the same.

 

[jallman]

I think Blair is correct in the assumption that the media is to blame for the anti-war mood.IF the media did the same crap in WWII we would have got asses handed to us.Because the hell is the public supposed to think when the only thing the media shows is "soldiers died in Iraq today","a suicide bomber or gun man shoot or killed a bunch of people in the market today" or "inmates were forced to stand a naked human pyramid at abu-grab-an-arab prison".The media doesn't tell us the death toll of the terrorist and insurgents,the media doesn't tell us what marines and soldiers received high awards,the media doesn't tell us how many hospitals coalition troops built,how many Iraqis citizens have coalition troops helped out in community projects.The reason why the media only shows us the bad stuff and not the good is because they want this anti-war sentiment.

You can not honestly tell me that if the media only showed the good coalition forces are doing and how many terrorist/insurgents our troops have killed that the anti-war mood would be the same.

Yes but extreme coverage (positive or negative) is nothing more than propaganda.

 

[jamesrage]

Yes but extreme coverage (positive or negative) is nothing more than propaganda.

Then by that definition of yours what the media is doing is enemy propaganda.I know that 3000+ troops have died and depending on which media source I go by the civilian death toll is around 20-60 thousand civilian deaths,but how many terrorist/insurgents did coalition and Iraqi forces kill?Who was the first woman to receive the silver star since WWII?Who was the first soldiers to receive the combat action badge?How many hospitals have our troops rebuilt and how many community projects over in Iraq have our troops been involved in?

Surely if the media was not being biased ABC,CBS,NBC,CNN,BBC,MSNBC and other liberal networks would tell us these things as much as they tell us how how many troops and civilians died in Iraq today.

Tony Blair is right about the media.The only reason why the media shows us the bad and not the good is because they want us to think nothing is being accomplished in Iraq.The media only wants us to think that troops are sitting around not doing anything except getting themselves and civilians killed.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

If this doesn't tell you that Blair is dirty nothing will. It's all about the oil and how to best exploit it. I just wish they had been honest about it.

What a crock of ish, if this was a war for oil then why is it that we didn't install a puppet dictator beholden to U.S. interests rather than giving the Iraqi's their freedom which they used to create a Constitution which guarantees that their oil is and will forever be nationalized???

 

[jujuman13]

Teflon Tony Blair is quite correct when he says the Media are to blame for the publics perdeption of the war in Iraq.
Had Mr. Blair cared to actually consider that had he been able to (as has Mr. Chavez in Venezuela) muzzled the Press, then possibly the public would have a far different opinion of the Iraq war.

Where Mr. Blair is incorrect is his assumption that the war in Iraq was about terrorism.

Other than the terror that Saddam Hussein inflicted on his own population, there were no so called foreign terrorists within Iraq before Mr. Blair answered his master's voice (Mr. Bush) and decided that the UK would become part of this democratizing of Iraq.

Undoubtedly the troops who are currently in Iraq are v broadly speaking able to assist the Iraqi's with their attempts to make a decent society for the Iraqi population.
But as with every contingent of foreign troops there will ALWAYS be those oh so few who commit various crimes against the Iraqi's.

I do have t admit that a defeat of terrorism will in all probability take at the minimum 20 years.

But consider, if we, that is the UK allied with the USA had not invaded Iraq, what would the ME look like at the moment.

With respect to Aghanistan, it is not well known that Iran was consulted with by the US as to what type of government should be installed to run that country after the defeat of the Taliban.

If only the US had continued discourse with Iran, but no, Georgey boy wanted to do things his way and naturally all he needed to do with Blair was whistle to get Blair to attend to him.

 

[jamesrage]

But consider, if we, that is the UK allied with the USA had not invaded Iraq, what would the ME look like at the moment.

Saddam would still brutalizing his people and the liberal democrats and the liberal media would still complaining that Saddam has WMDs just like they did even before Bush was in office.

 

[Hoot]

Blair is just mad because Bush/Cheney have lost their ability to manipulate the press as they did so well in the lead up to this war.

Now the truth is coming out.

 

[Makhno]

Oh, I am sorry Emporer Blair sir, I forgot you want us to keep on fighting war based on your pathetic LIES!

But then you always have been a snide, lying ceshire-cat grinning *******.


It's not a surprise that most Brits hate you.


Thatcher's child, indeed.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

I think Blair is correct in the assumption that the media is to blame for the anti-war mood.IF the media did the same crap in WWII we would have got asses handed to us.Because the hell is the public supposed to think when the only thing the media shows is "soldiers died in Iraq today","a suicide bomber or gun man shoot or killed a bunch of people in the market today" or "inmates were forced to stand a naked human pyramid at abu-grab-an-arab prison".The media doesn't tell us the death toll of the terrorist and insurgents,the media doesn't tell us what marines and soldiers received high awards,the media doesn't tell us how many hospitals coalition troops built,how many Iraqis citizens have coalition troops helped out in community projects.The reason why the media only shows us the bad stuff and not the good is because they want this anti-war sentiment.

You can not honestly tell me that if the media only showed the good coalition forces are doing and how many terrorist/insurgents our troops have killed that the anti-war mood would be the same.

If you want a positive picture of war, maybe you should switch to FoxNews. :shock:

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Then by that definition of yours what the media is doing is enemy propaganda.I know that 3000+ troops have died and depending on which media source I go by the civilian death toll is around 20-60 thousand civilian deaths,but how many terrorist/insurgents did coalition and Iraqi forces kill?Who was the first woman to receive the silver star since WWII?Who was the first soldiers to receive the combat action badge?How many hospitals have our troops rebuilt and how many community projects over in Iraq have our troops been involved in?

Depending on which source you use the death toll is between 40.000-650.000.
THe black numbers are so big, and so many people have been killed AS A CONSEQUENCE of the war in Iraq, that me personally assume the numbers are at least 150.000.

 

[jamesrage]

Depending on which source you use the death toll is between 40.000-650.000.
THe black numbers are so big, and so many people have been killed AS A CONSEQUENCE of the war in Iraq, that me personally assume the numbers are at least 150.000.

If the US worried about the number of civilian deaths that might occur as a result of the US getting involved you would be under Nazi Germany rule and every country in the world would be a ruled by a brutal dictator because people would afraid of civilian casualties. Casualties are always going to be a part of war because no enemy is going to come out in the open for us or anyone else to hit them.BTW you can blame civilian murders committed by terrorist/insurgents on the USA.I swear you peacenicks would never stand up to a dictator,because you idiots would be whining about casualties.I hope the war in Iraq is a success just so years later when Iraq is a peaceful democratic country the ant-war scum will be known by all as the scum they are.

If you want a positive picture of war, maybe you should switch to FoxNews.

I am too cheap to get FOX news as part of my cable package.Besides they are probably just as bad as the rest of the liberal media outlets.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

If the US worried about the number of civilian deaths that might occur as a result of the US getting involved you would be under Nazi Germany rule and every country in the world would be a ruled by a brutal dictator because people would afraid of civilian casualties. Casualties are always going to be a part of war because no enemy is going to come out in the open for us or anyone else to hit them.BTW you can blame civilian murders committed by terrorist/insurgents on the USA.I swear you peacenicks would never stand up to a dictator,because you idiots would be whining about casualties.I hope the war in Iraq is a success just so years later when Iraq is a peaceful democratic country the ant-war scum will be known by all as the scum they are.

I am too cheap to get FOX news as part of my cable package.Besides they are probably just as bad as the rest of the liberal media outlets.

You compare the second world war with Iraq? Dont you see the difference? :shock: :shock:

 

[jamesrage]

You compare the second world war with Iraq? Dont you see the difference? :shock: :shock:

Of course there is some differences.

1.During WWII the media was on our side.They didn't air enemy propaganda films ,nor did they air troop and civilian deaths as though the enemy was being victorious.Nor did they make a big deal out of troops shooting Japanese pretending to surrender.

2.Both the democrats and republicans where our side instead of the enemy's.

3.Not much attention was given to anti-war scum.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Of course there is some differences.

1.During WWII the media was on our side.They didn't air enemy propaganda films ,nor did they air troop and civilian deaths as though the enemy was being victorious.Nor did they make a big deal out of troops shooting Japanese pretending to surrender.

2.Both the democrats and republicans where our side instead of the enemy's.

3.Not much attention was given to anti-war scum.

Wow, if you dont see more differences you truly are brainwashed about the Iraq war and know nothing about the second world war.

 

[jamesrage]

Wow, if you dont see more differences you truly are brainwashed about the Iraq war and know nothing about the second world war.

There are some other differences,

1.Instead of listening to anti-war scum like they did before the US involvement in WWII,Bush didn't wait until Saddam got his hands on WMDs and attacked the US or some other country,although Saddam was a allowed to violate several UN accords before the US finally attacked.

 

[Iriemon]

What a crock of ish, if this was a war for oil then why is it that we didn't install a puppet dictator beholden to U.S. interests rather than giving the Iraqi's their freedom which they used to create a Constitution which guarantees that their oil is and will forever be nationalized???

They'd never get away with that.

 

[The Mark]

They'd never get away with that.

Who wouldn't?

And what makes you think that they wouldn't?

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by Trajan Octavian Titus
What a crock of ish, if this was a war for oil then why is it that we didn't install a puppet dictator beholden to U.S. interests rather than giving the Iraqi's their freedom which they used to create a Constitution which guarantees that their oil is and will forever be nationalized???

You can define "nationalize" any way you want too, but their about to give control of their oil to foreign investors for the next 20 years.

Draft Law Keeps Central Control Over Oil in Iraq
By James Glanz The New York Times Saturday 20 January 2007

Editors Note: What the story below says, is that a law that would govern the management of Iraq's oil and the profits generated from it, is under consideration by "Iraq's government". What the article does not say, is that the Iraqi government referred to operates out of a US military installation and the law under consideration would facilitate "foreign" participation in Iraqi oil affairs. Iraq has the second largest deposits of crude oil in the world. The US military occupation of Iraq is about to enter it's fourth year.

So much for not going there over oil.

 

[KidRocks]

So where is all this so called OIL that we went to war for?

I haven't seen a drop.

LOL... such fools!

And you'll never see a penny of that oil revenue because Big Oil has raked in obscene record-profits these last few years. Or don't you read the papers? Or watch the news on TV?