|
Post by Diogenes on Oct 30, 2001 13:53:57 GMT -5
This comes out of point Elric made in the precision bombing thread.
Yes, western news media enjoy a good deal of freedom to report what they want, even regarding such things as troop movements, etc.
A lot of people have criticized the media for doing exactly that, saying that the media are providing military intelligence to the enemy.
What seems not to have occurred to such critics, is that our own military/political leaders are not idiots (well, okay, some of them are) who fully realize that.
Don't you think they are using the openess of Western media to plant misinformation to deceive the enemy?
A good example of this occurred right before the bombing campaign started in Afghanistan.
If you will recall, the Bush administration had been saying in the days leading up to it that hostilities could not be expected to commence for some time yet.
This was pure, deliberate misinformation, designed to lull the Taliban into a false sense of security, with the Western news media the tool.
Thoughts, comments, flames?
|
|
Lord Bane
Peasant
D?faitiste Extraordinaire
Posts: 63
|
Post by Lord Bane on Oct 30, 2001 14:10:46 GMT -5
I see little use for this misinformation as a military weapon in the strict meaning of the word (in this specific situation).
Giving Taliban a sense of security ? They've been negotiating with the US for years now, without the least bit of succes. They'd be fools to believe that the US wouldn't take this chance to finally use "justified violence" to get through them to Osama. So if Bush was trying to make them losen up a bit with those statements 3 weeks ago, I don't think it did any good.
Which also goes for the current "mediawar". The US media (and the Arab (the pro-Taliban part anyway) and Taliban (if they have any) press of course) isn't trying to delude enemy intelligence, they're trying to "delude" the rest of the world.
|
|
|
Post by pedro2112 on Oct 30, 2001 20:50:24 GMT -5
Dio, the military will use any means at their disposal to win. The US used the media in WW2, big time. Since this is the only war since then that is actually justified as self defense (with all due respect to Korea and Vietnam) I hope they will do the same in this current conflict.
|
|
Zoras
Minion
Burn with the Dragon's soul
Posts: 203
|
Post by Zoras on Oct 31, 2001 4:34:09 GMT -5
Very true. I wouldn't be surprised if the US military has decided to use its own media as a way to encourage the enemy to take the wrong action. Misdirection is a powerful strategic weapon.
Then again, bad news sent to the public will only cause panic, which is not good to have in a time of war.
|
|
|
Post by pedro2112 on Nov 1, 2001 0:12:52 GMT -5
Then again, bad news sent to the public will only cause panic, which is not good to have in a time of war. Good point. I don't think they would do that. They never have before, and the negatives far outweigh the positives.
|
|
|
Post by ElricMorlockin on Nov 1, 2001 9:52:06 GMT -5
Absolutely! As in the Gulf War, air supremacy has been quickly achieved. Thus ground, communications/organizational facilities are wide open to assault from fighter-bombers and from Airborne special forces (as has been demonstrated). Since these countries then must depend on our media for information, I'm more than sure that false and/or misleading info is presented to the media. At the same time, our media is providing them with at lease some "intelligence" since it is virtually impossible for them to have their own on a large scale, again do to air supremacy. As in what happened in Viet Nam with Kronkite editorializing right after the Tet offensive, our enemies will also use our media to drum up sympathy from our people as well. However, in this particular circumstance, we have been repeatidly attacked by terrorist actions, sponsored by Al Quaida all over the globe, with the WTC being the "straw" as Koth said in another thread. They are also using Anthrax against us on a somewhat wide scale, so I cant really see people with common sense, here in the states, having any sympathies towards our enemies this time. Whereas it was easy to espouse that "we are killing innocent Vietnamese" etc then, they are attempting to kill not only our military/political leaders but also our kids!
|
|
Lord Bane
Peasant
D?faitiste Extraordinaire
Posts: 63
|
Post by Lord Bane on Nov 2, 2001 8:44:50 GMT -5
Elric!!! They are also using Anthrax against us Please tell me that's but a jest!
|
|
|
Post by ElricMorlockin on Nov 2, 2001 10:39:40 GMT -5
LB! I assume you're joking, I however was not! I know, you HAVE to know about the "surgical" anthrax attacks against our government and media facilities here in the states, not to mention the exposed postal employees. As of the other day a hospital worker died from the inhaled variety and officials are more or less clueless how she contracted this! (Btw.... I could also read your post as Belgium having instances resembling ours, but dont know if that is the case or not?) Granted this is mostly on our east coast, but even postal machine repair facilities, in nearby Indianna have been found to have trace elements of anthrax in its machinery. So in other words, every person in the country could have potentially been exposed through the mail. Simple contact with a package sent to Dan Rather in New York likely flowed through the Trenton NJ postal facility. I have several parts vendors in NJ, not to mention a plethora of service companies that send me information via the US mail. Some of these materials I have taken to my home office to review at night. This of course I no longer do, but think about this LB when you are contemplating sympathy toward the Taliban et al. My 17 month old son, could have contracted air born anthrax potentially, if the facts hold up in the case of the NY hospital worker. So, I assume that since hes an American hes the enemy yes?
|
|
Lord Bane
Peasant
D?faitiste Extraordinaire
Posts: 63
|
Post by Lord Bane on Nov 2, 2001 12:08:58 GMT -5
Geesh, you aren't joking. Elric, about everyone on this planet is now sure that it can't be Al Qaeda behind the Anthrax. Most even dare say it isn't good old Sadam either. Still a large part also has the guts to exclude Russia from the list, but I'll grant you that but a few actually risk to point at the US. If you don't take my word for this (which is very likely ), here ya go : www.iht.com/articles/36971.htm
|
|
|
Post by ElricMorlockin on Nov 2, 2001 13:22:20 GMT -5
LB! I dont know the exact science behind the complexity of the anthrax used against us recently, but do understand how it functions. Saying this Great Britain was removed from the list of possible "donors" of this strain. Iraq, USA and Russian are the only countries known to be able to produce this strain in the pure weapons grade form that we are seeing. As I stated before, I do not discount it being a possible anarchist group doing this here. The Nation of Islam, or better yet the Black Panthers, whose members include more than a few radical, misguided Islamic converts, should be suspect IMO With that said, and IF, they are in fact part of this, they either have contacts in the USA weapons lab or they have contacts with Iraq IMO. Whats most frightening is the complete lack of common sense demonstrated by our previous administration on who gets access to our military technology. It is appalling what went on under the benign guidance of the Clinton Administration, to be honest, the very thing I believe you mentioned as a scary scenario in one of the MH threads! And as far as Hussein and bin Ladens relationship winds up working out, I wouldnt at all be suprised to see them as "bed partners" to further both of their own aims. Hell even Hitler and Stalin were allies of convienance at one time!
|
|
|
Post by pedro2112 on Nov 2, 2001 14:25:16 GMT -5
LB and Elric, there is not enough information to even begin to speculate. For every shard of "evidence" pointing towards a foreign source (the fact it some were sent the morning of 9/11, the coincidence that pakistan is now under anthrax attack, the sophistication and high tech lab to make it so finely ground, etc..) there is also evidence showing it may be domestic. The fact of the matter is that we don't know right now where it came from. So calm down you too!
|
|
|
Post by Diogenes on Nov 2, 2001 15:01:22 GMT -5
Whats most frightening is the complete lack of common sense demonstrated by our previous administration on who gets access to our military technology. America has long been in the business of selling military technology to legions of shady characters. It is absurd to single out the Clinton admininstration for this. Elric, your political bias is showing. Regarding Anthrax, Pedro is quite correct that who is behind it is currently unknown. It could be either foreign or domestic bio-terrorists. We simply do not know at this point. Initially, everyone was quick to assume that it was part of Bin-Laden's war. That was merely an assumption, however. It is entirely possible that it is instead an unrelated domestic group that was just waiting for the right distraction to start its own campaign, and the WTC attack proved to be that distraction. <br>
|
|
|
Post by ElricMorlockin on Nov 2, 2001 15:21:28 GMT -5
America has long been in the business of selling military technology to legions of shady characters. It is absurd to single out the Clinton admininstration for this. Elric, your political bias is showing. Regarding Anthrax, Pedro is quite correct that who is behind it is currently unknown. It could be either foreign or domestic bio-terrorists. We simply do not know at this point. Initially, everyone was quick to assume that it was part of Bin-Laden's war. That was merely an assumption, however. It is entirely possible that it is instead an unrelated domestic group that was just waiting for the right distraction to start its own campaign, and the WTC attack proved to be that distraction. <br> No Dio, what is absurd was the Clinton program of giving access to the weapons labs. In the spirit of not hurting anyones fragile feelings about the color of security badges or the practice of removing computer hardware from facilities that contain sensitive information. The end result was that China walked away with just about every up to date ICBM technology that we have. Whereas they didnt have the ability to hit every part of our country at will with nukes, they now do. Thats whats absurd my friend! You of course dont have to believe me, look it up for yourself, its a matter of Congressional record. And my political leanings, absolutely! I specifically recall quite a few people saying, in the 92 election, that "character" doesnt matter in a President. Well, what does everyone say now? We got character for eight years all right, but in the buffoon category (ie. A complete Rube). Where we can all say Bill Clinton,"what a character", I doubt anyone being intellectually honest can say, Bill Clinton, "what character"! That we sell military goods to other countries is a given, we've been doing such for quite a long time. I am not singling out Clintons admin. on the selling of arms, but on their "loose" policy of access to our dangerous military secrets and weapons systems. We know for a fact, as pointed out above, that China has the entire ICBM tech. God only knows who else had access to other techs such as the weapons grade anthrax. Thats right we dont know who is behind that, which LB pointed out, and I added to, which includes people here in the states. I've said as much from the beginning on MH, but wanted to reiterate my thoughts here mis amigo. And your point is well taken Dio, it very well could be just another disillusioned anarchist such as Tim McVeigh! Only time will tell, but I sincerely hope that is sooner than later.
|
|
Lord Bane
Peasant
D?faitiste Extraordinaire
Posts: 63
|
Post by Lord Bane on Nov 3, 2001 2:54:19 GMT -5
Thank you, Elric, for a moment there you had me under the impression you were sure it actually is Al Qaeda behind the Anthrax.
Personally, I'd put my money on some extreme right-winged (domestic) group, though.
|
|
|
Post by pedro2112 on Nov 3, 2001 12:32:48 GMT -5
Personally, I'd put my money on some extreme right-winged (domestic) group, though. A few days ago I would have agreed with you, but not anymore.
|
|