What is Digg?Sponsored by Threadless
This Game Sucks view!
threadless.com - Grab this epic gaming tee for only $12 during the Threadless Holiday Sale!
251 Comments
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -9/+80Fox is not news. Fox reports to the White House. Fox is the Bush Whie House's propanganda machine pure and simple. So, the fact that they are drumming the Iran war so loudly means that the Bushies are preparing to strike. All the talk about an airstrike means that there is going to be an airstrike.
Does everyone realize how reviled we are around the world, and how much worse its going to be after Bushwar #3?
What in the world are we doing? Can't the citizens of this country stop this madness? If not, why not? - physphd, on 10/10/2007, -1/+70I was not a military careerist, so I wasn't in long enough to go to War College, but after 12 years active and reserves and serving in combat in Panama, Gulf War 1, and the Balkans, it seems like these talking heads and even the current commanding generals know nothing about planning an operation or campaign.
A prevailing school of thought is to plan an operation backward, i.e. start with a good, solid exfil or exit strategy. This is constantly preached as a 'lesson learned' from Vietnam, that apparently wasn't given Iraq. But to use an exit strategy presupposes that you've met some pre-defined criteria or conclusion: you've won or you've lost. And that's what bothers me vis a vis Iraq and potentially Iran. Not only is there no coherent exit strategy, but we quite literally don't know what we're fighting for. What would constitute a "victory"? "Defeating the terrorist!" Great, but what does that mean? Capturing somebody? Killing x number of supposed terrorists? We must have gotten them already because now we only fighting "insurgents". If 18 year old private Snuffy who's actually prosecuting this damn war doesn't know what the goal is, then we're lost already because we can say what a win would look like. Every political analyst has an opinion, but why can't SecDef or POTUS come out and say in exact terms why we're fighting.
We keep hearing "We can still achieve victory in Iraq," and "We can succeed in Iran." What does that mean? Bomb Iran's nuclear power plants? Dissolve the government? Install another repressive dictator? Occupy? You can't "win" without a scoreboard, and "be nice" is not a metric.
It just seems open ended and not thought out at all - even this old knuckle dragger can see that. - archistudent, on 10/10/2007, -8/+63So, I'm watching the clip. Usually I wouldn't because it's Fox (not)News, and well, you know...
But it's really interesting to see how they piece the clips together. There are four scenes from the deck of aircraft carriers (about 1/3 the way in). I couldn't help but notice a plane launching off the left side of the screen. Now, I've served on an aircraft carrier before (Nimitz), and I knew something wasn't right. It appears that Fox News has horizontally flipped the video. The only reason I can guess as to why is that they needed to not show the same angle of fighters taking off for every shot.
If Fox (not)News does this, they are knowing manipulating the imagery to maximize effect. News should only be as is. There shouldn't be any flipping of images (or spinning of the information for that matter). - bratpack8, on 10/10/2007, -3/+42Simply waiting for the magical Gulf of Tonkin incident to light the fuse.
- sundancekid503, on 10/10/2007, -0/+37If the US doesn't win this one they can basically forget about the playoffs.
- gummih, on 10/10/2007, -3/+33I find that video revolting
- a6n28f, on 10/10/2007, -3/+31We feel powerless. We've been shown quite clearly that our votes don't count, the Democrats are no different anyway, who dares protest with the arrests and taserings that are being reported everyday. Besides, who can take the time away from work when so many have to live paycheck to paycheck in the ever-shrinking middle class. What effective mechanism exists that can't be quickly silenced by being branded an enemy combatant without evidence, warrantless searches and arrests.
- conceptkid, on 10/10/2007, -6/+30Sean Hannity needs to be sent to Iraq and make him sit on an IED. Hes the armchair quarterback of Generals
- OGla, on 10/10/2007, -5/+29This is scary. The propaganda films of the nazis is nothing compared to Fox news.
- jumbalia, on 10/10/2007, -3/+24ok so there's the planning of the first 24 hours of the invasion, now what about the 6+ years that follow? I guess they'll cross that bridge when they get there... if it's not already been blown to *****
- orelses, on 10/10/2007, -8/+27Another fist in a another hornet's nest.
- Calann, on 10/10/2007, -3/+21Conservatives are the wimpiest pussies imaginable. I grew up in an era when a true madman Josef Stalin, had nuclear armed ICBMs pointed at the U.S. and yet nobody peed their pants like conservatives are doing now.
I wish conservatives would grow a spine already and stop being afraid of their own shadow. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+19i alternate between hannitys radio show and Limbaugh's radio show, and IMO hannity is much farther to the right than Limbaugh, and his material is garbage. case in point; when the Minnesota bridge collapsed, hannity and Limbaugh both covered it, but hannity picked out some political comments that were made about the bridge collapse, and went nuts talking about how awful it was to make political hay out of this tragedy. but that didn't stop him from using the bridge comment as political-talk-show filler material on his show for the next week. also, he was STILL talking about the betray-us ad yesterday, and has covered it every day since the story broke. Limbaugh may be a douche, but at least he has a diverse way of attacking liberals. hannity just beats a dead horse into hamburger. he had better improve the quality of his show if he wants to keep listeners tuned in. also, hannity *allegedly* lets liberals on the radio, but when they nail his ass on something, he just cuts them off, calls them a name and moves on. he makes no effort to answer the liberals challenges. of course the next caller will join him in talking about how the previous caller was an idiot... what did the next caller *actually* call for?
- a6n28f, on 10/10/2007, -1/+18Interesting. It seems so simple, but I never though of it that way. Everybody has an opinion, but no two people can even articulate the same mission. WMDs? Oust Saddam? Form the government?
But I also don't think it's an accident or incompetence. Cheney's Project for a New American Century report in the late 90s laid the current scenario out as a path to establishing a permanent presence in the Middle East, and so far it's like reading from a script. That cannot be an accident. They told us what they wanted to do and now it's happened. The part that keeps me awake at night, though, is when they talked about how a pretext would be needed for the initial invasion. And not only did we get a big one in 9/11, but we got in right on time just as soon as they had settled in the White House. It's almost too monstrous to contemplate, but if the rest of it reads like a script that's come true.... - Waiting2awake, on 10/10/2007, -2/+18Why? Might get tasered? Thrown in a secret prison? Have his conversations listened to? Maybe have his home invaded? Good thing the US isn't a dictatorship - So says George Bush - the decider.
None are so easily enslaved than those that think themselves free. - strib666, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15They'll never go anywhere in the playoffs with such a sucky QB.
- Bleue, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15I am frankly stupefied that the weapons of mass destruction routine is being attempted again. Not certain if that originates with FSN or with the government, but either way it shows one of two things: either the US Government, or whomsoever is responsible for that revival, is extremely stupid or they assume the public is, and frankly i'm not sure one is more acceptable than the other.
Unless Americans are still buying it? Being from Canada i can't say for sure but from conversations I have to assume that US citizens understand the monumental hosing they got the first time around. The weapons of mass destruction rhetoric is so blatantly fabricated, in fact it's public relations speak for 'we don't know anything about what they have, but it could be bad' and this is obvious, isn't it?
It was my understanding that this term was an embarrassment for the parties involved as almost everyone believes that there are no, and never have been, weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. That this was an out and out lie to help convince the public, or at least this is my interpretation. Do most Americans have a different point of view? So much so that the strategy is worth pursuing again?
Either way the Iraq war has effectively killed the entire republican party, not just the Bush administration, for at least the next two congressional terms though probably more, so stupid as thye may be I cannot believe there will actually be an Iranian invasion. - trer, on 10/10/2007, -3/+17What a brave man this Sean Hannity is. He is willing to sacrifice the lives of other people's children for the greater good of his country. He is a true Red White and Blue American. God Bless.
- mmazing, on 10/10/2007, -2/+16Listen to NPR, much better :)
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13Good thing they don't have internet nor TV in Iran, otherwise they'd be aware of our strike plan.
- Waiting2awake, on 10/10/2007, -4/+15The second they do that - they are by definition not news - but opinion. Wonder why your electorate is so confused?
- joel2600, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.
~ George Orwell - carcinogen, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11Hey look, I found someone who's part of the problem. Isn't that neat.
- MaximusIGN, on 10/10/2007, -4/+14Here we go again. Start the fear mongering so the dumb population is begging Bush to bomb Iran before their "sleeper cells" launch "nuclear weapons" in the US....How can people not see the White House helping script that "news" piece? It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.
- Timetheos, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12What a load of crap: "You're free to save your money"
When I went to college, much of it was spent living off of Ramen and Kool-Aid. There was no "saving" unless I wanted to go hungry.
Not everyone has the luxury of saving. - Graves138, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9The worst ***** part is in a week half of America will believe that Iran is a huge threat to us. This ***** is ***** disgusting.
- 2reflective, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8There are so many little tricks like this used all the time, and not just by Fox. For example, each time you see a President or Prime Minister talk to the troops, you will always see the troops standing *behind* them (a strange way to talk to people I'm sure you'll agree). It sends a powerful message to our subconscious.
- sovereign3, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8For the administration the goal for Iran would the same for what the goal in Iraq always was: regime change.
The Iraq war, though purported to be about WMDs, was always about eliminating Saddam. We had our reasons for eliminating him; mostly it was about oil policy. The goal for Iran would be eliminate the Islamic Regime in Iran.
For those who know nothing of contemporary Iranian history, here's a quick primer. We overthrew their Shah in 1953 to install Reza Pavlavi [sic] as their new leader. The reason being was that we wanted their oil and the Shah wouldn't do business. In 1979 the Islamic Revolution overthrew our puppet leader in Iranian and they were rightfully angry because he kowtowed to American interests. We have forgotten our prior involvement in Iranian politics. The Iranians never have.
In short, the goal would be regime to install another government friendly to the US that will export their oil at a reasonable (that is: unfair to Iran) price. The problem, however, is that much like Iraq, it will fail. What PNAC and AEI fail to understand is that you can't change a government simply because you don't like it. The Iranians will not want us there any more than the Iraqis want us there. They're not stupid and they our reason being there has everything to do with their resources. The same resources we don't allow them to export now because we don't like their government. - ipeelscats, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8I feel like an idiot for actually paying taxes so that they can just bomb whoever they want without consulting the public. If I had more money i would leave this country and never look back.
- Kwilco, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Conservatives != Neocons. The current administration is as far from conservative as you can get.
- carcinogen, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Okay. And tha'ts when those damn Syrians will start attacking us during our occupation of Iran.
Then those crazy assed Saudi's, man, after we invade Syria.
Then the rest of the world as they realize we're imperialists bent on dominating the world's resources.
Awesome plan, man, great use of logic, vastly illuminating your perfect understanding of foreign policy. Can't wait to see you sign up yourself or your kids to put the boots on the ground. - GorfTron, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8After watching both this and then Pelosi's wimpish excuses, I just don't give a ***** anymore.
- carcinogen, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8OH NOES NOT THE LIBERAL MEDIA WE'RE ALL DOOOOOMMMED
You're amazing. You're beyond hope. The hypocrisy in your post is astounding. Here, in the face of an obvious Fox News propaganda piece, and here you are, your mind rationalizing your absurd pro-war, pro-republican, pro-conservative thought process. Are you really so afraid that, in the end, your thought process -- your party -- your precious Fox News... Is failing you?
Conservatives hate adaptation. Even more so, they hate admitting that they were wrong. As a result, they rationalize how their wrongs were right. It's sad, really. - nebbo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Or we could just leave Iraq and they wouldn't have the opportunity to attack us?
- Timetheos, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Straw-man
- inajeep, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10"Last month, Brave New Films put together a video showing how Fox’s rhetoric towards Iran is eerily similar to it’s pre-war rhetoric on Iraq."
I don't need Brave New Films' video to know that it's the same story as Iraq. WTF are they smoking? I liken it to Texas Holdem', we are in this far, might as well go all in type of attitude. - Stryder81, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8lol Gen Sean Hannity...
What is more interesting is how they barely speak about Ahmadinejad's speech at columbia. If he was that " looney " they'd still pick out statements he said for a long time to come, but we hear nothing. Straight to the dramtic movie of " IRAN, NUCLEAR, ATTACK ON US? O NO! "
Come on man...Grow up - Ndiggnation, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9My God..I'm not really much of a reactionary, but Christ it's time for regime change *here*. Don't these chickenhawks ever *learn* from any mistake?
- Cyberen, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Fear is the little death that brings total oblivion.
- griz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7IM IN UR HEAD SPINNING UR BRAIN
- tHePeOPle, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Thanks for pointing that out. I wouldn't have noticed that myself. Wow.
- Nougat, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Indeed, if you have the luxury of saving, you very likely have the luxury of donating noticeable sums of money to political candidates and PACs, so that your voice *can* be heard.
- j1337, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8If Sean Hannity said it, it must be okay!
- swrostmore, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Who dares protest? Hundreds of thousands of us, you pussy! The junta in Myanmar is shooting protesters, and their citizens are still out in the streets! Grow a pair!
- chuckbo, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Hey, journalists promoting war to sell newspapers has a glorious history -- wasn't it Hearst who goaded America into the Spanish-American war? (Oh, wait, I forgot that "all wars are created by Christianity," so maybe I'm cynical for thinking that there's a profit and greed motive involved.)
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5The video is straight from FOX News, you idiot.
- wendelgee2, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Wow. You're a real prick.
- griz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Just the intro has so much spin in it that I threw up before watching the clip.
Watch the images and listen to the audio and see how they finely craft the way the audio relates to the video in a way that is more threatening.
Anyone who has seen explanation of how Darren Brown does his mind tricks knows exactly how this works.
Also, aren't I correct in saying that that was Russia's "Father of all bombs" in the intro clip??
Come on FOX, you make me sick!!! - Coven, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Try signing up for the military and saying "I want to sign up to fight for the war in Afghanistan, and ONLY the war in Afghanistan" and watch the look on the recruiter's face. You can't pick the fight when you sign up.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 252 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is