• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

If today's media reported the battle of Midway

M14 Shooter

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
http://www.strategypage.com/hotstuff/articles/humor20051121123.asp

This would be funnier if it weren't true.

Obsolete Equipment
Some critics blamed the failure at Midway on the use of obsolete aircraft. The inappropriately named Devastator torpedo planes proved no match for the Japanese fighters. Even the Avengers, its schedule replacements, were riddled with bullets and rendered unflyable. Secretary of War Stimson dodged the question saying simply: "You go to war with the Navy you have, not the Navy you want or would like to have". Critics immediately called for his resignation.
 

Diogenes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
4,980
Reaction score
3,059
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
And if today's media reported on D-Day:
June 6, 1944. -NORMANDY- Three hundred French civilians were killed and thousands more wounded today in the first hours of America's invasion of continental Europe. Casualties were heaviest among women and children.

Most of the French casualties were the result of artillery fire from American ships attempting to knock out German fortifications prior to the landing of hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops. Reports from a makeshift hospital in the French town of St. Mere Eglise said the carnage was far worse than the French had anticipated and reaction against the American invasion was running high. "We are dying for no reason," said a Frenchman speaking on condition of anonymity. "Americans can't even shoot straight. I never thought I'd say this, but life was better under Adolph Hitler."

The invasion also caused severe environmental damage. American troops, tanks, trucks and machinery destroyed miles of pristine shoreline and thousands of acres of ecologically sensitive wetlands. It was believed that the habitat of the spineless French crab was completely wiped out, threatening the species with extinction. A representative of Greenpeace said his organization, which had tried to stall the invasion for over a year, was appalled at the destruction, but not surprised. "This is just another example of how the military destroys the environment without a second thought, " said Christine Moanmore. "And it's all about corporate greed."

Contacted at his Manhattan condo, a member of the French government-in-exile who abandoned Paris when Hitler invaded said the invasion was based solely on American financial interests. "Everyone knows the President Roosevelt has ties to big beer," said Pierre LeWimp. "Once the German beer industry is conquered, Roosevelt's beer cronies will control the world market and make a fortune."

Administration supporters said America's aggressive actions were based in part on the assertions of controversial scientist Albert Einstein, who sent a letter to Roosevelt speculating that the Germans were developing a secret weapon, a so-called "atomic bomb." Such a weapon could produce casualties on a scale never seen before and cause environmental damage that could last for thousands of years. Hitler has denied having such a weapon and international inspectors were unable to locate such weapons even after spending two long weekends in Germany.

Shortly after the invasion began reports surfaced that German prisoners had been abused by Americans. Mistreatment of Jews by Germans at so-called "concentration camps" has been rumored but so far, remains unproven.

Several thousand Americans died during the first hours of the invasion and French officials are concerned that uncollected corpses pose a public health risk. "The Americans should have planned for this in advance," they said. "It's their mess and we don't intend to clean it up.
 

Old and wise

Active member
Joined
Aug 28, 2005
Messages
310
Reaction score
0
Location
New England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
M14 Shooter said:
"You go to war with the Navy you have, not the Navy you want or would like to have".
I believe that one of the current idiots in our government said the same thing about us going into Iraq.:rofl
 

M14 Shooter

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Old and wise said:
I believe that one of the current idiots in our government said the same thing about us going into Iraq.:rofl
Um... that's kind of the point, isnt it?
Maybe the irony was buried in too plain of sight.
 
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
306
Location
Geelong, Australia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Nothing has changed. The media back then got its information from censored millitary briefs. Fast forward to the War in Iraq, and you have censored, sanitised millitary briefs.

Maybe if the media in Hitler's Germany had reported in the manner of the 'Liberal' media, Germans might have not had so much stomach for his plans.

War is war. The sooner we start taking into account civilians, maybe we might stop killing each other.

As I recall all of the liberal media still attended the millitary censored and sanitised news briefs in Qatar (correct me if I am wrong) during the actual invasion stage of Iraq. How many times did we see the actual dead bodies, wounded civilians, or soldiers coming home in body bags?
 

M14 Shooter

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Australianlibertarian said:
Nothing has changed. The media back then got its information from censored millitary briefs. Fast forward to the War in Iraq, and you have censored, sanitised millitary briefs.
Thats not the issue.
The issue is the slant that the media puts on the facts given to them.
All of the facts in the Midway 'story' were correct, except that the hypothetical media outlest spun said facts into a defeat for the US in place of the overwhelming victory we all know.

Is it at all a stretch to say that this is going on with the reporting in Iraq? Of course not.

This is what happens when facts are filtered through an agenda.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
M14 Shooter said:
Thats not the issue.
The issue is the slant that the media puts on the facts given to them.
All of the facts in the Midway 'story' were correct, except that the hypothetical media outlest spun said facts into a defeat for the US in place of the overwhelming victory we all know.

Is it at all a stretch to say that this is going on with the reporting in Iraq? Of course not.

This is what happens when facts are filtered through an agenda.
Yup...

You could have an all-day battle with the insurgency which kills 3000 terrorists and the Marines end up with one guy with a bruised elbow...The NYTimes headline would read...

Increased American Casualties in Iraq War...:roll:
 
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
306
Location
Geelong, Australia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Ha, what I have raised is exactly the issue.

It is wrong to give the public censored, sanitised news briefs on the war. Period.

You can put right/left/liberal/conservative whatever slant you want on it, but it propaganda, period.

If you guys think that everything would be better if more favourable slant was put on government controlled briefs so be it. I find that crazy.

I want all of the facts, not government spoon fed propaganda, that is then rehased liberal or conservative, for the various demographics in America.

You have FOX News and they may put a more favourable slant on the war.

Point is that CNN and FOX News are not getting the full story, because the millitary is not giving journalists the same acess to information, as was the case of the Vietnam War.

So regardless of the political slant of the reporting, the deception by the government remains the same, because of censorship.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
M14 Shooter said:
Here is a exerpt from a letter to the President.

"I wonder how well you have been sleeping these last nights? Mothers and fathers all over our beloved land are spending sleepless nights worrying again over their boys being sent to fight wars on foreign soil—wars that are no concern of ours."




Bush?



No.


Truman during the Korean War.

http://www.michellemalkin.com/
 

t125eagle

Active member
Joined
Sep 15, 2005
Messages
384
Reaction score
7
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
what?? we won midway! lol
 

mpg

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
7,795
Reaction score
1,784
Location
Milford, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Say whatever you want about Fox News, but they're out numbered by ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN.

Edit: BTW, those Fox jokes are exaggerated. The others aren't.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
mpg said:
Say whatever you want about Fox News, but they're out numbered by ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN.

Edit: BTW, those Fox jokes are exaggerated. The others aren't.
That's all they know what to do...When they can't debate, they throw up photoshopped pictures that any 4 year old can do and say "Wow...I'm SOOOOOO creative!"...

Check out the "Anti-Bush Photos" thread in the "On the lighter side" forum...

Currently, there are 102 pictures in that thread...a few repeats...

Here's the breakdown...

Outright photoshopped or legitimate pictures, but with captions meaning to insult - 70
Cartoons - 11
Actual untouched photos with no surrounding BS(ready for this?) - 7

Here's the kicker - All of the ones that referenced the War on Iraq as a positve? 14 - ALL of them legitimate...
 
H

hipsterdufus

cnredd said:
That's all they know what to do...When they can't debate, they throw up photoshopped pictures that any 4 year old can do and say "Wow...I'm SOOOOOO creative!"...

Check out the "Anti-Bush Photos" thread in the "On the lighter side" forum...

Currently, there are 102 pictures in that thread...a few repeats...

Here's the breakdown...

Outright photoshopped or legitimate pictures, but with captions meaning to insult - 70
Cartoons - 11
Actual untouched photos with no surrounding BS(ready for this?) - 7

Here's the kicker - All of the ones that referenced the War on Iraq as a positve? 14 - ALL of them legitimate...
Last week, if I would have put up a photoshop picture saying that O'Reilly would bomb SanFransico, you would have thought that a humourless joke as well. :roll:
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
hipsterdufus said:
Last week, if I would have put up a photoshop picture saying that O'Reilly would bomb SanFransico, you would have thought that a humourless joke as well. :roll:
Your sarcasm is duly noted...and wrong...that statement is actually a true one...

Your attempt to portray me a non-equal-opportunity photoshop basher falls on deaf ears...

cnredd said:
What the hell is with these photoshopped pictures?

I can understand a picture where someone is legitimately in a compromising position or a real flub, but to make one up does nothing to add to debate...:roll:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/showpost.php?p=137554&postcount=28

A) The date shows that it is not something I've done in the last couple of hours to prove my point.
B) It was in response to a photoshopped picture of Kerry which I found equally naive and undebatable...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/showpost.php?p=137350&postcount=25
 

BWG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 29, 2005
Messages
4,373
Reaction score
1,602
Location
South Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
cnredd said:
That's all they know what to do...When they can't debate, they throw up photoshopped pictures that any 4 year old can do and say "Wow...I'm SOOOOOO creative!"...

Check out the "Anti-Bush Photos" thread in the "On the lighter side" forum...

Currently, there are 102 pictures in that thread...a few repeats...

Here's the breakdown...

Outright photoshopped or legitimate pictures, but with captions meaning to insult - 70
Cartoons - 11
Actual untouched photos with no surrounding BS(ready for this?) - 7

Here's the kicker - All of the ones that referenced the War on Iraq as a positve? 14 - ALL of them legitimate...

Wasn't this thread started as a joke, rather than a debate?


From near the top of the page that was linked in the first post:

StrategyPage's Military Jokes and Military Humor



The title of this thread:

If today's media reported the battle of Midway



Why would it be inappropriate to follow with photoshopped pictures with this theme?

If Fox News Had Been Around Throughout History
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
BWG said:
Why would it be inappropriate to follow with photoshopped pictures with this theme?
I am not speaking as a Moderator of the forum...I am speaking purely as a forum member(We're allowed to do that)...:2wave:

Most people know that when a Mod is conducting "official business" they put their writings within [Moderator mode] headers & footers...

The term "inappropriate" would be a term I would use, but it is not official Debate Politics policy...If it were, I would have removed photoshopped pictures long ago...

So I'm just speaking for "cnredd" not forum policy...

These pictures are only meant for the purpose of being derogatory, inflammatory, and insulting...compare the number of photoshopped pictures on this website that are negative with the ones(if any?) that are positive...

I find it distateful...IMHO
 

BWG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 29, 2005
Messages
4,373
Reaction score
1,602
Location
South Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Never thought of you being in [Moderator mode] in this instance.


Topic of thread:
Today's media covering historical event.

Topic of photos:
Today's media covering historical event.

Nothing more, nothing less.






..And I thought Kerry's T-shirt was funny.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Australianlibertarian said:
It is wrong to give the public censored, sanitised news briefs on the war. Period.

You can put right/left/liberal/conservative whatever slant you want on it, but it propaganda, period.
Well that depends, there are lots of things the public doesn't need to know and divulging would help our enemies. If a reporter finds out we are training for a mission to some area of course he should be censored from reporting that. If we capture an important enemy figure yes we may censor that fact so the enemy doesn't know it.

If you guys think that everything would be better if more favourable slant was put on government controlled briefs so be it. I find that crazy.
I think it would be much better if the media reported more of the good things that are happening rather than concentrating on every death that occours. For instance CBS and ABC news gave one line, that's one line, deep into thier broadcast announcing the passing of the Iraq constitution. But spent quite a bit of time at the beginning of that days broadcast on a bomb here and a death there and protest by so-and-so.

I want all of the facts, not government spoon fed propaganda, that is then rehased liberal or conservative, for the various demographics in America.
Well in a time of war you are not going to get, unless we all promise not to tell the terrorist.

You have FOX News and they may put a more favourable slant on the war.
Actually they put a balance view of the war out, they put many people on that oppose it. The difference is they report the good along with the bad as opposed to the leftist media.

Point is that CNN and FOX News are not getting the full story, because the millitary is not giving journalists the same acess to information, as was the case of the Vietnam War.
Where do you get that from. We have reporters inbedded with troops all over Iraq. Granted there are quite a few in Iraq who won't go out of the green zone and actually report on what is going on in Iraq. But I have not reason to believe that access is more limited than in Vietnam.

So regardless of the political slant of the reporting, the deception by the government remains the same, because of censorship.
So for instance if we broke the code that Alqaede uses you think you have a right to know it? If we are centering in on a key location of theirs, you think you have a right to know it? If we capture an important person and don't want them to know we have him you think you have a right to know it?

What is it exactly you don't think you know and how do you know you don't know it?
 

Stu Ghatze

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
531
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
It would be reported this way:


"American muscle flexing leading to danger with Japan"!

OR:

"America engaging in hegemony, & exploitation, ...Japan fights back!"

OR:

"American naval power reducing poor Japanese to kamikaze suicide missions"!

OR:

"America's arrogant presence in south pacific creating tensions"!

OR:

"United nations condemns America of unprovoked aggression"!

;)
 
Top Bottom