Latest - Western forces prepare for Military strikes in Syria, strike just hours away

bumper234 wrote: »

So we should only believe it's true if it comes from fox, cnn, nbc etc?

Journalistic standards and integrity (let's exclude Fox which is a conservative mouthpiece, possibly CNN too)

realweirdo wrote: »

Convienently ignore the fact that America confronted and helped defeat three of the great evils of the 20th century Nazi Germany, Emperial Japan and the USSR. (Ireland stayed neutral). Ignore the fact that but for the US, South Korea would be a communist run sh*thole like North Korea. Ignore the fact that America is the biggest provider of humanitarian assistance in the world by far. Ignore the fact that America is about the only nation confronting Islamic terrorism, yes in a war where there is collatoral damage, but the alternative is to allow the spread of Islamofascism unchecked. It really is a case of either or in this situation. Ignore the fact that America sent the Taliban packing from large parts of Afghanistan.

And basically ignore every good deed America has ever done in its history.

You don't do balance do you?

Bold:The USSR fell by itself. And the US didn't help (notice "help") defeat Nazism or Japanese fascist imperialism out of the good of it's heart. There was an obvious strategic interest. You'd have to be blind not to see that. For every good deed there is an appalling atrocity. I'm not going to give you a history lesson because these things are so well known by this stage even by people who have little to no grasp of history. I suggest you go to Eason's and buy a history book (not a school textbook) and broaden your knowledge with regard to these things. I could give you a list if you really desired, or some material in a PM.

Here's a video- watch if it you want. I don't particularly care if you don't, though (and I wouldn't be surprised): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Arn3lF5XSUg

I noticed that you conveniently ignored the rather well-known fact that South Korea was a dictatorship truly unique in it's evil behavior. You have only shown your sheer pig-headed ignorance of history when you handwave the murder of up to 1 million suspected communists by Rhee's awful regime.

Italics: Overall, maybe, but considering that it is the country with the highest GDP in the world, it's contribution is rather low. The USA is 15th in the Humanitarian Response Index, hardly the best in the world by far.

Secondly, a lot of humanitarian aid is wasted anyway as it poured down poor African corruption sinks.

Now, regarding your spiel against "Islamofascism" (a neologism invented to vindicate US behaviour in the middle east)- most of these groups either:

A- Received funding and training from the good ol' USA
or
B- Were formed in response to perceived American/British/French/etc. imperialist behaviour in the Middle East

Underlined: Of course the US has done some good. Then again, the USSR (which you hate and despise because it was the antithesis of your beloved USA) was also the biggest contributor to the defeat of fascism and did other things besides.

Now, stop trying to derail the thread with your bizarre shrill pro-American rants and let's get some ground covered regarding the debate in Syria. We all know you love the USA and would like to have it's babies, but nobody here particularly gives a ****. You are ruining a perfectly good thread.

Yours exasperatedly,
Eggy.

donegal__road wrote: »

there is a large market in the US (and elsewhere) for media that portrays non western countries in a bad light, regardless of whether it's true or not.

True, and when you can see through both, you're probably on the right track.

donegal__road wrote: »

ok, I'll put it to you like this... I grew up listening to bbc reportage on events during the 'Troubles' in Northern Ireland. I happen to live in very close proximity to Northern Ireland, and heard eye witness accounts of what actually happened on the ground from locals... I soon realised that what was being reported in the news, was manipulated to support the British agenda. My awareness of propaganda and the public mind began around that time.

Yah, I watched both, Irish and English and sometimes I'd notice a different slant on the same incident.

However there's a fairly large gap between that and the outright propaganda and conspiracy mongering attitudes of state-run stations like RT. Different kettle of fish altogether.

The best course of action is to try and watch/read as much as you can and form your own opinion based on what you can get.

realweirdo wrote: »

To say the US had no role in the fall of the USSR is frankly the most bizarre thing I've read on here. The USSR ran out of money. Much of it had to do with keeping up an arms race with the USA. Another major part was fighting a costly war in Afghanistan which the US fought as a proxy conflict. Defeat in Afghanistan was the beginning of the end. That's my last comment on the USSR as like you said I will try to keep it relevant to Syria from now on. You can reply to this post if you want but that's it.

Yes, let's aim to stay on topic - and Eggy Baby!, could you dial the exasperation down a notch, please, or at least the expression of it?

moderately,
Scofflaw

Just regarding RT- I'd like to repost one of my posts from a much earlier thread that I feel, personally, sums RT up:

Sometimes media is just impartial to suffering. For example, there is a massive civil war in the Congo that has been going on for ages and left millions dead, millions maimed and lots more impoverished and starving. It continues to rage every day, yet there is no media coverage. The last media I saw on it was Ross Kemp's hour-long documentary there and that was a year ago. Whereas crap like Clint Eastwood's speech to the chair is analysed, spoofed and reported on incessantly for days.

Car bombings in Iraq that kill dozens get tiny bite-sized stories. These things were reported on all the time during the Iraq War, as the insurgents were the "enemy" and it was chic to report on their atrocities. Now there is very little reporting on it, presumably because there is little appetite for stories on Iraq any more after the withdrawal.

A more recent example is the Pussy Riot case. Over here they became the poster girls of the Russian opposition movement, whereas in Russia you couldn't locate their actual fan-base with an electron microscope. Same with "opposition figures" like Gorbachev, Kasparov and Nemtsov. The Guardian in particular was being spammed with stories and editorials about them, because there is an anti-Putin appetite over here these days since the protests began.

So usually there is an agenda here, maybe not a political one but certainly papers are trying to sell copies, or their websites are trying to get hits, and that's why they reports on some stuff but ignore other things.

Whereas RT caters to a different consumer base, and this is reflected accordingly in its stories.

RT is as bad as, if not worse than Fox. I've yet to find any article or report on RT that is in any way critical of Putin or the Kremlin. Activists with microphones become war correspondents, debate shows are one-sided affairs and the channel is a lucrative podium/soapbox for anyone disgruntled with the US or Israel, no matter how loopy.

What's sad is it's a reflection on the nations press - whom are absolutely terrified to the point of self-censorship. There are still hundreds of incidents of sackings, intimidation, beatings and worse on editors, journalists and staff - it's the most dangerous place for a reporter in Europe by a long shot.