Ugly and Sad

[VaporTrail]

Vapor, I can't imagine you haven't seen a marked change in reporting on the military since Obama decided to ramp up the meat grinder.

 

WSS

 

Do I sense some sarcasm there? I wouldn't expect a change in president to drastically change how military reporting works, however, I still have a problem with covering up and denying that a mistake was the reason that two reporters and a bunch of Iraqis were killed. Add to that they used coercion and force to try and prevent the truth from coming out claiming that it "threatened national security." I realize this is nothing new, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. I'm glad the people of wikileaks had the balls to do this.

[Westside Steve]

Do I sense some sarcasm there? I wouldn't expect a change in president to drastically change how military reporting works, however, I still have a problem with covering up and denying that a mistake was the reason that two reporters and a bunch of Iraqis were killed. Add to that they used coercion and force to try and prevent the truth from coming out claiming that it "threatened national security." I realize this is nothing new, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. I'm glad the people of wikileaks had the balls to do this.

 

Actually it seems to me that this sort of thing was covered a lot more a few years ago under the bush administration.

I do not think that the Obama administration is requiring the news media to report in this fashion I think that they downplay this sort of thing these days on their own. The Cindy Sheehans and whistle blowers are all pretty quiet since it's

Obama's war.

WSS

[VaporTrail]

Actually it seems to me that this sort of thing was covered a lot more a few years ago under the bush administration.

I do not think that the Obama administration is requiring the news media to report in this fashion I think that they downplay this sort of thing these days on their own. The Cindy Sheehans and whistle blowers are all pretty quiet since it's

Obama's war.

 

Hmm... Maybe, maybe not. I don't see why this has to be a blue vs red type of deal. I mean, regardless of who's in power, the military should be held accountable for their actions.

[Mr. T]

Sound likes the hippies are resurfacing and going hi-tech nowdays, hell why not they dont get their name for nothing. they are a lot more hip than the average Joe. Thats what they think.

 

 

How much would you want to bet that this group of hippies is an Anti-American Anti-War protesting organization?

 

 

 

Source

 

 

 

Still, the release of the video has also drawn criticism — not so much for the broader WikiLeaks mission of promoting government transparency, but for the site's failure to supply a fuller context to help viewers better understand what they're seeing. A former helicopter pilot and photographer named A.J. Martinez, for example, has dissected the footage on his blog, and attacked the site's packaging of the footage as misleading — and making it seem like the Apache unit was acting out of cold-blooded malice rather than genuine confusion about a possible ground attack taking shape below. "There are many veterans with thousands of hours experience in both analyzing aerial video and understanding the oft-garbled radio transmissions between units," he writes, adding that it would not be unreasonable for the WikiLeaks staff to solicit such interpretive input for concerned vets. "Promoting truth with gross errors is just as shameful as unnecessary engagement" on the field of battle, Martinez concludes.

 

Yahoo! News contacted Reuters for comment, and a Reuters spokeswoman directed us to their story on the episode, in addition to providing us with the following statement:

 

"The deaths of Namir Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh three years ago were tragic and emblematic of the extreme dangers that exist in covering war zones. We continue to work for journalist safety and call on all involved parties to recognise the important work that journalists do and the extreme danger that photographers and video journalists face in particular," said David Schlesinger, editor-in-chief of Reuters news. "The video released today via WikiLeaks is graphic evidence of the dangers involved in war journalism and the tragedies that can result."

 

 

 

[VaporTrail]

T, once again, has missed the point. I'll spell it out again. The criticism is not with the pilots. They acted efficiently within the dictated RoE, what you hear sounds cold, but it's "gallows humor." The major criticism was the coverup and attempt to bully wikileaks into not releasing the video.

[Mr. T]

They seem to be nothing more than Anti-War protesters and his have an agenda set against the US.

 

 

 

It is sad that there is collateral damage in war, but that is just the nature of the beast.

[Westside Steve]

Actually it seems to me that this sort of thing was covered a lot more a few years ago under the bush administration.

I do not think that the Obama administration is requiring the news media to report in this fashion I think that they downplay this sort of thing these days on their own. The Cindy Sheehans and whistle blowers are all pretty quiet since it's

Obama's war.

 

Hmm... Maybe, maybe not. I don't see why this has to be a blue vs red type of deal. I mean, regardless of who's in power, the military should be held accountable for their actions.

 

I guess.

But, and I don't mean to sound harsh, it is war.

There probably isn't a day within any war that one can't find something terrible to report and that is what the headline will read.

 

What I'm saying is that we saw a lot more of this kind of "expose" when those in the business of bringing that kind of mistake to light also had the agenda to tarnish the Bush admin.

Now that deaths have gone way up (civilian and US) in Obama's war of choice you inexplicably hear a lot less outrage.

And there's not even any "oil to steal."

 

Either somebody's trying to make Obama look good or the 90% democrat press corps has had a miraculous infusion of patriotism.

 

Thats all.

WSS

[Chicopee John]

Now that deaths have gone way up (civilian and US) in Obama's war of choice you inexplicably hear a lot less outrage.

 

'Less' is being very kind, Steve.

 

To my ears, I'd say there is virtually NO outrage.

 

The anti war folks have traded in those signs and slogans for 'Health Care For All' replacements.

 

[VaporTrail]

Check out this follow up.

 

 

But still, I don't understand why the government felt the need to cover this up in the first place. Had they made this known immediately, the headline would instead be, bad guys get blown up by 20mm cannon (they've shown violent videos such as this on CNN, Fox, etc. and it was never an issue).

[DieHardBrownsFan]

Check out this follow up.

 

 

But still, I don't understand why the government felt the need to cover this up in the first place. Had they made this known immediately, the headline would instead be, bad guys get blown up by 20mm cannon (they've shown violent videos such as this on CNN, Fox, etc. and it was never an issue).

 

I don't think "covering it up" was meant to be "evil". Although I'm sure Heck will come in and blast the evil military. As you just provided, there is way more to this story then first portrayed by the Wiki group. These journalists could have been double sided. Actually helping the insurgents with their press credentials. Who knows?

[VaporTrail]

We'll never really know, but if we did, would it matter? I still don't see why it's a good idea to actively try and prevent the disclosure of this video.

[heckofajobbrownie]

I guess.

But, and I don't mean to sound harsh, it is war.

There probably isn't a day within any war that one can't find something terrible to report and that is what the headline will read.

 

What I'm saying is that we saw a lot more of this kind of "expose" when those in the business of bringing that kind of mistake to light also had the agenda to tarnish the Bush admin.

Now that deaths have gone way up (civilian and US) in Obama's war of choice you inexplicably hear a lot less outrage.

And there's not even any "oil to steal."

 

Either somebody's trying to make Obama look good or the 90% democrat press corps has had a miraculous infusion of patriotism.

 

Thats all.

WSS

 

This is really getting ridiculous.

 

Now you can't even differentiate between the war most Americans came to think was a tremendous mistake, and the one most Americans support?

 

One waged in the spot that housed and still houses many of the people who planned and carried out 9/11, and one waged in a completely different place, where none of those people resided?

 

According to you, the only difference is the president. This is getting mind-numbingly simplistic with you. And predictable. You run to this base in every post.

 

You've been in the league for five years now. Let try and get that batting average over .178. It may be the best on your team, but that doesn't make it good.

 

[calfoxwc]

partisan progressive sniping = wailing over soldier death count every day... and the fact that battles are taking place... fake agonizing to diss Bush.

 

 

until Obama gets elected, then quietly hiding behind quiet opposite world support for anything Obama does.

 

flip flop. Upside down again and again. Whatever furthers the goals of progressivism.

[Westside Steve]

This is really getting ridiculous.

 

Now you can't even differentiate between the war most Americans came to think was a tremendous mistake, and the one most Americans support?

 

One waged in the spot that housed and still houses many of the people who planned and carried out 9/11, and one waged in a completely different place, where none of those people resided?

 

According to you, the only difference is the president. This is getting mind-numbingly simplistic with you. And predictable. You run to this base in every post.

 

You've been in the league for five years now. Let try and get that batting average over .178. It may be the best on your team, but that doesn't make it good.

 

 

Only because the self appointed umpire is a die hard fan of the other team.

 

And no, Heck, I don't see much difference.

There's probably not one aspect of this dead end war of choice that you didn't bitch about in the last one.

Maybe this one is even more useless, but I'll give the generals the benefit of the doubt.

All I'm saying is you peace lovers are hypocrites.

(Well the ones that love Obama more than they care about peace)

Especially in the light of Obama's gloating over keeping the Bush plan in place in Iraq.

The one he whined about for all those years.

 

And since when does public support have dick to do with the Obama agenda?????

 

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

I'm just shaking my head. Again. What a ridiculous discussion.

[Westside Steve]

We'll never really know, but if we did, would it matter? I still don't see why it's a good idea to actively try and prevent the disclosure of this video.

 

 

Hey VT if you wanna make the military look bad these things are great.

 

I think that now, with Obama ramping up the drone strikes most rational observers will admit that there will be more civilian casualties.

We agree so far?

 

So would you think that video of each of those occurrences shoud be brought to light?

 

Witrh Obama as the war mongering baby killer?

 

Or should we just dig into the archives to the Bush era?

 

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

Yes, I do. I think we should see pretty much all of it. But that's just me.

 

And yes, Obama's directives have resulted in the death of innocents, including children. He doesn't intentionally target civilians, but knows the methods he prefers will end up killing civilians. There's not much moral wiggle room in there.

[Mr. T]

These guys make great sacrifices, maybe if you watch this some will be more appreciative of what they do.