Winning in Iraq isn't News

And yes, as the election approaches, you will hear less and less good news on Iraq.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticle ... 4023809577

coalmeister wrote:And yes, as the election approaches, you will hear less and less good news on Iraq.

Good news on Iraq? (that'll be reported right after the "good news" about getting terminal cancer)

"Good news on Iraq? (that'll be reported right after the "good news" about getting terminal cancer)"

So there is zero chance of good news in Iraq? Most interesting flexibility in thinking I must say ole' boy

coalmeister wrote:So there is zero chance of good news in Iraq? Most interesting flexibility in thinking I must say ole' boy

The only good news from Iraq will be when the last US GI leaves there & my last tax dollar is wasted there!

You don't see the drastic reductions in the level of violence in Iraq as good news? It's a morbid topic but there's been more troop deaths this month due to accidents than from hostile engagements. Deaths of civilians and troops are at their lowest points since this thing started and have been for a few months now. We have talks now of setting a timetable contingent upon continued success. This is not good news?

This is not being covered in the media adequately IMO. For years we saw reports of bad news, death and destruction splashed across the front pages of newspapers and the lead story of the nightly news. Things turn around and the story is no longer news and relegated to filler in the back of the newspaper somewhere.

Richard S. wrote:Deaths of civilians and troops are at their lowest points since this thing started and have been for a few months now. We have talks now of setting a timetable contingent upon continued success. This is not good news?

It's the same "Good News" that we could have had over a year ago when the "Sunni Awakening" lead to much reduced violence in Iraq & a "Timetable" was described as a "Surrender Date". How about the American GI's that are still dying there every month?..... Exactly what are they dying for?.......... & what do we tell the families of their brothers in Afghanistan who are dying because there aren't enough troops there because we are still in Iraq?
Then there is the little matter of our tax dollars that are being squandered over there, by the billions each month. No Richard, I see very little good news about dragging this situation out any longer!
As I have said before, if I was CinC I would order all US personnel out of Iraq by tomorrow afternoon! No U.S. interest's can be served by our continued presence for the purpose of "saving face" for some politicians here in the US!

Devil505 wrote:How about the American GI's that are still dying there every month?..... Exactly what are they dying for?

Because the headline 10 or 20 years from now will read, 50 Al Qaeda terrorists trained in Iraq kill millions in the U.S. and it was George Bush's fault for pulling out of Iraq when it was clearly going in the right direction. The U.S. government gets blame now for what transpired in Afghanistan, why would you think the consequence's would be any different if we pulled out of Iraq? Undeniable fact is that its succeeding and the media is not reporting it anywhere near what they did when it was a mess.

I think there is two reason why, firstly death and destruction sells. Secondly the media has a bias towards Republicans, if this was Democrat in office I'd venture to guess he would hailed as the greatest President ever for having the foresight to not back down from both Republican and Democratic leaders in Congress who did not want to allow the surge to go forward.

Edit:Just to add keep this on topic, this discussion is about the lack of media coverage of the recent events in Iraq. Whether you think its good news or bad news is irrelevant. . This topic will not run into another debate about whether we should or should not be in Iraq.

Richard S. wrote:I think there is two reason why, firstly death and destruction sells. Secondly the media has a bias towards Republicans,

I agree with your first statement but disagree with the 2nd one.
Death & destruction sell because it keeps people tuned in for the next commercial. (When was the last time you saw a news helicopter hovering over a truck, pointing out that the truck WASN'T on fire?

As far as a media bias is concerned, I think the only bias the media of today (2008) has it towards money! As I said above, they will go with any story that will keep you watching their commercials.....period!
Maybe in the 1950's-1960's you could make a good argument for a liberal media bias, but now the accountants have taken over everything, including the media. There is no political bias any more........Only an economic one.......

Example: In the 1950's -1970's CBS News was a separate division & not required to show a profit. Sometime in the 1970's, CBS placed CBS News under its "Entertainment" division & began insisting that it turn a profit like any other sitcom or soap opera.

"As far as a media bias is concerned, I think the only bias the media of today (2008) has it towards money! As I said above, they will go with any story that will keep you watching their commercials.....period!
Maybe in the 1950's-1960's you could make a good argument for a liberal media bias, but now the accountants have taken over everything, including the media. There is no political bias any more........Only an economic one......"

Are you kidding?? Have you looked at the NY Times stock price lately? I will save you the look up, 2 years ago their stock was $26, now it's half that. That paper has no credibility, every page is nothing more than a liberal opinion page. Some liberals aren't to bright or they cut their nose off in spite of their face which is not to bright either...

Seen MSNBC or NBC numbers lately? Pitiful, but that does not stop them from one sided reporting. I'm sure you would say Fox News is not "fair and balanced" but their viewer ship numbers would indicate otherwise. People can tell the difference-

coalmeister wrote:Seen MSNBC or NBC numbers lately? Pitiful, but that does not stop them from one sided reporting. I'm sure you would say Fox News is not "fair and balanced" but their viewer ship numbers would indicate otherwise. People can tell the difference-

Instead three of networks dividing up total viewership, now you have many. Each with a smaller niche of the total viewers available, but each "worshiping" money........& making plenty of it! (I don't even count newspapers as media anymore as they are a dying breed) ........& no...... Fox is no more "Fair & Balanced" than is MSNBC, which at least doesn't try to pretend it is.
One thing they all have in common though: Profit is the sole motive for their existence! (don't let them convince you anything else matters, because it doesn't!)

Then why is Fox News, the relative new kid on the block, cleaning CNN's clock?

coalmeister wrote:hen why is Fox News, the relative new kid on the block, cleaning CNN's clock?

First, I don't buy that story

Second, are you claiming that Fox isn't selling it's "product" like all the others? (Fox just found it's niche to sell to, just like MSNBC sells to its niche)



On any given day, one media giant may lead the others in viewers, but there's always tomorrow.


Are you arguing that these media corporations are somehow more interested in providing a public service than they are in making money? (if that is your argument, I bought a bridge from Coalkirk that I may be able to interest you in!)

The only truly honest network that exists is CSPAN. All the others are like hyenas taring at the carcass of the viewing public to gulp down their share of the $$$$$.

I think liberal outlet like MSNBC and CNN and the NYT lose the forest for the trees and think they are giving the people a fair product, ever heard of Dan Rather? He certainly was lost as was his bosses right up until the end when even they could see how biased he was.
And no I do not think cable news wins some and loses some, Fox trounces CNN every single day and when there is a world event it goes into double digits. "CNN the most trusted name in news" only in their own minds as the people have spoken otherwise

coalmeister wrote:think liberal outlet like MSNBC and CNN and the NYT lose the forest for the trees and think they are giving the people a fair product,

Are you going to tell me that you honestly think Fox News presents a "fair & balanced" perspective?

Serious answer please.


& please post some links (other than Fox News) to back up this claim of yours: ......"Fox trounces CNN every single day and when there is a world event it goes into double digits."

Devil505 wrote:& please post some links (other than Fox News) to back up this claim of yours: ......"Fox trounces CNN every single day and when there is a world event it goes into double digits."

Cable News Ratings for Friday August 15, 2008
Monday, August 18th, 2008

Live + Same Day Cable News Daily Ratings for August 15 2008 P2+ Total Day

FNC – 958,000 viewers
CNN – 461,000 viewers
MSNBC – 619,000 viewers
CNBC – 312,000 viewers
HLN – 311,000 viewers

P2+ Prime Time

FNC – 1,580,000 viewers
CNN – 554,000 viewers
MSNBC- 632,000 viewers
CNBC – 128,000 viewers
HLN – 647,000 viewers

http://tvbythenumbers.com/category/top-news