Peter Arnett

[dublix]

So it's the media that his interview was broadcast on, not his comments themselves, that piss you off. I can understand that, but I doubt that there are many Iraqis who experienced a change of heart because of this guy's interview.

With all due respect, you are putting words in my mouth. I don't like it when the media make so much of an event just to get viewership. (And how do you know what is pissing me off?) I'm not a hostile person although i do have strong views on world events, especially when my fellow countymen are involved.

I guess what I was trying to say was that revisions are probably being made, which doesn't mean that the whole war plan is changing. But it seems that the war plan was relying on a few crucial elements, namely the 'shock and awe' campaign and the 'psy-ops' part of the war, in the hope that most troops would surrender. This would have saved them a lot of work, but they underestimated the resolve of the Iraqi troops and the Iraqi people. Suicide bombs, 'underhanded' tactics and other related things had to have thrown a spanner in the works of the war. Right now they would have to be looking at a modified war plan to what they initially formulated.

Point taken on this note. Obviously minor and maybe not so minor tweaks will have to be made, after all this is a war.

[powertoad5000]

With all due respect, you are putting words in my mouth. I don't like it when the media make so much of an event just to get viewership. (And how do you know what is pissing me off?) I'm not a hostile person although i do have strong views on world events, especially when my fellow countymen are involved.

I meant the fact that it was on Iraqi television and may have strengthened their resolve to repel the aggressors. Because there are many people who agree with what he is saying in the United States and Britain, but they are not branded traitors. I do understand how people could get annoyed about it being on Iraqi television, but he is just one journalist, and I doubt that he would have made that much of a difference to the Iraqi people's resolve to defend their homeland.

You can take 'pissed off' as 'a tad annoyed' if it makes you feel better , and I concede that I was putting words in your mouth and will avoid doing this in the future.

[dublix]

Aw shoot it isnt a big deal, i understand what your trying to convey. You could help me out though with my mouse question out on the front page,LOL. Just kidding.

a tad annoyed

yes i am.

[Dhej]

Oh my God, a reporter reported on the otherside of the story, the side that isn't marketable to the American-Disney news agencies. The reason why he couldn't say that on our tv is because if the news broadcasts negative information, we turn off the tv or tune into American Idol.

Treason, how is speaking your mind treason? Did he endanger our troops? How could he, if we are revising our war plan to compensate for the resistence that we didn't expect that doesn't demonstrate any weakness on our part, it shows that we are damn serious. The siple fact of the matter is that revising our tactics should put more fear in their hearts than us simply marching in with one plan devised from our ever so reliable information network. How is it that you warmongerers automatically assume that changing plans is a weakness, you have to adapt or else everything becomes suicide missions. How many plans were there circulating around before the storming of Normandy Beach? I'm guessing that it probably wasn't the only one. Someone that sends human beings into a place without a plan b or c is commiting murder in my oppinion, the nature of war is trying different things until you decimate your opponent. He didn't say how we were changing our plans, he just said we were.

What I find more horrid than the fact that he said this on Arab tv, is that Arab tv is the only place where he can say it. Do you really think that CNN or NBC would allow their ratings to drop? Do you really think that they would allow the homogeneity of the American Press to be broken. In America we think of ourselves as having Freedom of the Press, only because the way our press is controled is more incipid, more insidious, it is controlled by money. Journalistic integrity has been dead for years now, yet no one has even blinked, except maybe Arnett, but then he let himself be itimidated by all to the blood-lusting treason shouters.

Stop reading between the lines..., stop reading between the lines..., goddamn, I'll do better than that, I'll stop reading the American drivel entirely. Bonjour "Le Monde", hello "The Register." People who watch Fox or read USA Today and think that they are getting anything more than entertainment are greatly mislead. News stops being news when it stops presenting both sides of the information.

I guess I keep forgetting that:
[gloworange]TO BE COMPLACENT IS TO BE AMERICAN. [/gloworange]

I forgot that patriots don't ask questions, they follow blindly where their leaders tell them to, oh damn that's right, that isn't patriotism that's nationalism.

Dhej

Oh, and I just wanted to qualify that post by saying that were America to be in iminent danger (which G.W. Bush admitted that we aren't because this is a "Preemptive War") I would be more than will to be on the front lines.

I am not anti-American, I am anti-nationalist.

Our country stops being what these men and women are fighting for when we stop asking questions. How can it be the land of the free if we are afraid to open our mouths? The most powerful dictator is a public full of fear that turns against itself. People can spout freedom of speech all they want, but if you are only free to speak pro-government, where is the freedom?

Hypocrits...

Dhej

[cheyenne1212]

Number One I think that Peter Arnett stepped out of bounds on this one. What he said is very untruthful. OUr War plans have not failed. We are not having to regroup. At this very moment while I am typing this our troops are within 18 miles of Baghdad. I also believe what he said might also help to covince more people to come over and fight for Saddam which would be more loss of life which is what we do not want. This War is only against the regime in Iraq.

I am glad that he is no longer working for NBC, or National Geographic. Maybe since he's got a job in Britain he won't come back here.

Also I regret the loss of civilian life in this war, but that sometimes happen. We have tried our best to not hit anything civilian, but our buddy Saddam is hiding a lot of his weapons in civilian areas. Once Saddam is out of power then the Iraqui People will have a country where they don't have to be afraid to speak out against somebody. They don't have to worry about being used as shields for the protection of some equipment.

[Negative]

"Why can't you ever write something about the postive aspects of war, goddamn??". This was thrown into some journalist's face by American general Willamson.
"The only way to change things here is to convince the American people that our actions in this country are necessary."
A colleague of Williamson, general Norton, to the same journalist: "It doesn't matter if it's right or not! You scared the homefront, and I won't tolerate that!"

This happened some fourty years ago. The generals are already forgotten, the journalist was Peter Arnett, correspondent for AP (Associated Press) in Vietnam. In his Vietnam-memoirs, he wrote: "We couldn't close our eyes for the reality of the battle-field, nor could we ignore the failure of American policy."

Last Monday, 69-year old Arnett was fired by NBC. He had told Iraqi television that the first American attack-wave hadn't turned out as hoped. Although not an earth-moving conclusion, America was in shock... NBC didn't want to stand up against Pentagon pressure, and fired its reporter.

This wasn't the first time Arnett pissed off the Pentagon. "War as usual", that's how one could describe the relationship between Arnett and the military governments. During the Gulf war, he's been called a colaborator. In the 1960's, someone wrote in a memo to President Johnson that "the problem Arnett could harm the US more than an entire batallion of VC."

Long before CNN made him world-famous (or was it the other way around?), Arnett already was a professional war-correspondent. praised by his colleagues, libelled by authorities. Although most people still think he's American (yeah, I'm also talking about most people in this thread), his New-Zealandian nationality has been used to make him look anti-American. Most people called him the 'icon' of superficial journalism during the Gulf War, comparing his 'superficial journalism' to the journalism during the Viet Nam war, not knowing Arnett was there.

In Death in the Ricefields by Peter Schol-Latour and in Without Honor by Arnold Isaacs, Arnett is described as "one of the most experienced and respected" from all of the Vietnam-journalists. In 55 days. The Fall of South Vietnam., Alan Dawson calls him probably the most respected newsman ever stationed in Vietnam, a combat veteran and an expert at getting around..

In 1962, Arnett joined AP in Saigon. Arnetts' story on Vietnam focused on the battle against military propaganda. "The authorities couldn't understand why we didn't praise the American prestations as the press had done during WWII and the Korean war", he writes about 1962.
When in 1965 he was the first to write on experiments with chemical weapons by the US government, President Johnson ordered the FBI to find something to mute Arnett.

In 1981, Arnett left AP for CNN. 18 years later he had to leave CNN after he made a contribution to a documentary about chemical warfare in Vietnam. "The only reason for my resign, was that the Pentagon and the conservative right-wing didn't like my journalism. CNN wanted to get rid of me, so they could continue their patriottic presentations."

Peter Arnett has my respect.

Originally posted by KorpDeath
And then to add insult to injury he comes out and publicly apologizes only after he gets fired from every network he works for, that's real sincerity if you ask me

His only mistake was to go work for networks that don't like freedom of speech, networks that don't like the truth, networks that are in the hands of those he fulminates with reason against.

Originally posted by Dublix
What surprises me is NBC hailed him as some kind of ultra worthy reporter when they hired him. His comments are d*** near treasonist to me.

That comment only tells me how much you know about Arnett. It'd surprise me if you knew that he worked in Vietnam, that he's not even American,...

Originally posted by Proactive
Except for this, mr Arnett's analyzis of the current situation is exactly the same as those we see on BBC every day. Which means this is a common opinion that many commentators share.

Note: Arnett was immidiatly hired by another newsprovider after being sacked. I think an English newspaper.

Indeed, Mr. Arnett's analyzis of the current situation is not exactly a secret, although some people wouldn't mind if it were. All non-embedded journalists share his point-of-view.
Congratulations to that English newspaper that hired him.
Journalists like Arnett will never be without a job. Too many people love the truth.

Originally posted by iNViCTuS
Even if what he said was correct, and I am not saying it is, it is still WRONG. Whether your for or against the war or the administration, it is a time to stand behind your country and it's allies. IMHO Arnett deserves to be sentenced with treason and the endangerment of allied lives.

Stand behind "your" country and its allies?
Note to Invictus and the doofus who gave him positive antipoints: Mr. Arnett ain't American.

Originally posted by cheyenne1212
Number One I think that Peter Arnett stepped out of bounds on this one. What he said is very untruthful. OUr War plans have not failed. We are not having to regroup. At this very moment while I am typing this our troops are within 18 miles of Baghdad. I also believe what he said might also help to covince more people to come over and fight for Saddam
which would be more loss of life which is what we do not want. This War is only against the regime in Iraq.

I am glad that he is no longer working for NBC, or National Geographic. Maybe since he's got a job in Britain he won't come back here.

For God's sake... Rommel once said that war ain't about weapons, it's about logistics. And logistics is something the American army underestimated. Yes you have troops within 18 miles of Baghdad. And your troops are hungry if you hadn't noticed yet. The supplies can't follow the troops, which is why you have to regroup. Even CNN acknowledges this (see link by PowerToad5000).

[dublix]

That comment only tells me how much you know about Arnett. It'd surprise me if you knew that he worked in Vietnam, that he's not even American,...

Well be surprised my friend, i already knew that he's been an american citizen for i believe 25 years. And i did know that he worked in vietnam.
Your comment seems kind of arrogant to me.