| Author |
Message |
    
Hootowl
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 01:24 pm: | 
|
The daily casualty reports aren't on the front pages of the NYT and CNN anymore either. That kind of reporting mysteriously ended in 2009 as well. |
Fahren
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 01:41 pm: |
|
26797/,News on Iraq
(Message edited by fahren on December 09, 2011) |
Mortarmanmike120
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 02:21 pm: |
|
Lol at linking Miltary Times. Thats your example of front page reporting? Fail. Linking Military times to refute that NYT and CNN no longer show casualty reports on the front page... Ha! That's like linking an article from American Rifleman to show how the media hasn't glossed over fast and furious. |
Mortarmanmike120
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 02:44 pm: |
|
ok, that sounded a little more snarkey then I'd intended. I apologize for that. Still, c'mon man. Not a Very good example. |
Mortarmanmike120
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 02:46 pm: |
|
Ha! You changed the link from Military Times to the Onion?? Wow, you should run for office. |
Drkside79
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 02:47 pm: |
|
Well casualties dropped to under 70 a year after 09. Not that I agree with it but those numbers aren't as disturbing from a media standpoint. |
Drkside79
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 02:51 pm: |
|
Also not saying i doubt it but is their any tangible proof to Hoots statement. eg what percentage of the time was that on the front page before and after? How does such a removal coincide with loss of life decreasing? Or was just plain and simple the economy Obama's birthplace and the Tea Party/OWS just plain and simple more profitable from a sales standpoint.? |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 02:54 pm: |
|
The military times article references an onion article, so I believe he's just pointing the link to the article the military times was referring to.
Neither article addresses or refutes my earlier post, I don't think that was his intent. The onion article points out that we're leaving, and don't care what happens next, whether that's true is debatable, but hey, it's a satire piece. I thought it was pretty funny. |
Fahren
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 02:55 pm: |
|
^^^ What Hootowl Said. Edited the link. Didn't do Military Times on purpose - it was just for the clip from The Onion embedded into it. It was not an attempt to refute anything, just a little injection of levity.
For that indiscretion, I shall suspend my presidential campaign, in the hopes of sheltering my family yada yada yada. :- )
(Message edited by fahren on December 09, 2011) |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 02:57 pm: |
|
LOL as long as you're just suspending, and not canceling  |
Johnnymceldoo
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 02:59 pm: |
|
If this cabinet has ties to GE and GE owns MSNBC, does profit matter as much as not hurting a friend of a friend? |
Sifo
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 03:02 pm: |
|
Well casualties dropped to under 70 a year after 09. Not that I agree with it but those numbers aren't as disturbing from a media standpoint.
 |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 03:17 pm: |
|
Interesting graph. Since O escalated the war in Afganistan, it shouldn't surprise anyone that deaths increased beginning in 09.
What happened to the numbers in Iraq?
Regardless, it is no longer front page news, not because it isn't news (if it ever was) but rather because the press doesn't want Obama to look bad like they did GW. The media used our fallen brothers (for those of us who served) as stage props in their game of political theater. The casualty reports were a means to bash Bush, and nothing else. People die in war.
It isn't news.
May as well report on the number of people who die of cancer every day, every single day. Can you imagine if the NYT ran a front page article on cancer deaths every day? People would wonder what the heck they were thinking about.
No, it was politics, plain and simple. And that why NYT, and all those like them are not news agencies, they are an extension of the DNC propaganda machine.
I'm talking about their news, not their opinion pages. They can opine all they like, just put it in the opinion section and label it as such. |
Drkside79
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 03:26 pm: |
|
Well i was referring to Iraq. which fell in 09/10
Either way I'd be willing to bet it was reported on. |
Drkside79
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 03:27 pm: |
|
Which is what was linked earlier.
Yet again SIFO tactics at work. Discredit through misdirection. Although i do leave myself open to it by not being 100% airtight on statements which i will endeavor to change.
(Message edited by drkside79 on December 09, 2011) |
Drkside79
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 03:31 pm: |
|
Oh and this is from yesterdays NYT is that recent enough?
The Department of Defense has identified 1,830 American service members who have died as a part of the Afghan war and related operations. It confirmed the death of the following American this week:
SHARP, Ryan D., 28, Sgt., Army; Idaho Falls, Idaho; First Infantry Division.
A version of this list appeared in print on December 8, 2011, on page A10 of the New York edition with the headline: Names of the Dead. |
Drkside79
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 03:33 pm: |
|
Oh and on Nov 25th
Names of the Dead
Published: November 24, 2011
\r
Follow @NYTNational for breaking news and headlines.
Twitter List: Reporters and Editors
The Department of Defense has identified 1,826 American service members who have died as a part of the Afghan war and related operations. It confirmed the deaths of the following Americans on Wednesday:
DIENER, Jackie L. II, 20, Pvt., Army; Boyne City, Mich.; 10th Mountain Division.
REIFF, Zachary C., 22, Cpl., Marines; Preston, Iowa; First Marine Division.
A version of this list appeared in print on November 25, 2011, on page A12 of the New York edition with the headline: Names of the Dead. |
Drkside79
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 03:35 pm: |
|
Here's one from July
Afghan Civilian Deaths Set a Monthly Record, U.N. Says
By ALISSA J. RUBIN
Published: June 11, 2011
Recommend
Twitter
Linkedin
Sign In to E-Mail
Print
Reprints
Share
KABUL, Afghanistan — The United Nations announced Saturday that May was the deadliest month for Afghan civilians since it began keeping count in 2007 — most likely a reflection of intense fighting, as militants seek to show they can stand up to the surge in American forces and try to undermine the government of President Hamid Karzai as it prepares to start taking over security.
Enlarge This Image
Rahmat Gul/Associated Press
A bomb killed two police officers and wounded nine others who were investigating an earlier explosion late Friday in the eastern province of Laghman, a spokesman for the provincial governor said.
Related
U.S. Sending Training Agents to Afghanistan to Stem Infiltration of Local Forces (June 11, 2011)
Although the monthly record of 368 deaths is compared with 2007, it is effectively the highest number since the war began, because civilian casualties appear to have been far lower before then.
The majority of the casualties, 82 percent, were caused by Taliban and other militants, while 12 percent were caused by NATO troops and Afghan forces; in 6 percent of the cases, it was not clear who was responsible.
Even as the numbers were announced, a particularly deadly roadside bombing left 15 civilians dead in southern Afghanistan, among them 8 small children and 4 women.
Civilian casualties are a major concern of the United Nations, whose special representative to Afghanistan, Staffan de Mistura, has made a public effort for their reduction. The United Nations rarely announces monthly figures, but did so for May because the numbers were so high, officials said.
“The last time we saw figures like this was August 2010, but that was right before the parliamentary elections and typically we’ve seen increases in violence right before elections,” said Georgette Gagnon, the United Nations director for human rights in Afghanistan. “This time, there is no one event around which the violence is centered.”
The civilian deaths on Saturday occurred in Arghandab District of Kandahar Province when a large roadside bomb went off under a minibus carrying people from two related families. They were traveling to a famous shrine frequented by those seeking the healing of a child or family member.
The place where the attack occurred is an arid and mountainous area that lies near the border with neighboring Khakrez District, where the Taliban continue to be active, even though they were supposed to have been cleared out of Arghandab by NATO and Afghan troops last fall.
Security forces were also targets on Saturday, with a senior police officer and another officer killed by a suicide bomber in southeastern Afghanistan. The senior officer, Col. Mohammed Zahir, is the head of the quick-reaction force for Khost Province. The bombing was one in a string of attacks on senior police officers in the past several weeks.
Two police officers were also killed late Friday, by a roadside bomb in Mehtarlam, the capital of Laghman Province, which is scheduled to be among the first areas where Afghan security forces will begin to take full responsibility in a few weeks.
Two members of the NATO force were killed Saturday, one in an attack in southern Afghanistan and one in a helicopter crash in eastern Afghanistan, according to a NATO statement.
Taimoor Shah contributed reporting from Kandahar, Afghanistan, and Farouk Mangal from Khost, Afghanistan.
A version of this article appeared in print on June 12, 2011, on page A20 of the New York edition with the headline: Afghan Civilian Deaths Set a Monthly Record, U.N. Says. |
Sifo
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 05:43 pm: |
|
Well i was referring to Iraq. which fell in 09/10
Well you didn't say that. The issue being discussed was solders killed in combat. Let's just see how honest your are being with your claim that the death toll fell in 09/10...
Same graph for Iraq.
Looks like the drastic decline came in 08 from the surge that GWB did. The same surge that BO said would fail and cost lives. So what did BO do in Iraq when he got power? He didn't change a damn thing. Shove that up your arse!  |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 05:52 pm: |
|
Dark, an article from July? Really? That was 6 months ago. It was every day when GW was in office, or near enough to every day as it makes no difference. |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2011 - 11:37 pm: |
|
That was the ATF, not the military.
The ATF, ( most shooters ) the FBI ( snipers ) the Texas Nationa Guard ( helicopters, armored vehicles, support )and the US ARMY. ( tanks used to pump lethal ( and flammable )concentrations of toxic gas into the building, run over, crush and destroy underground shelters and all evidence not wanted shown. )
Note that the Army got involved when the ATF lied about the holy bozo leader having a meth lab. That put it all under the "war on drugs" and allowed the violation of posse comitatus.
I'd have to go look, but I don't think the Girl Scouts sent sappers. They may be the only ones not involved.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_massacre#Weapons _2
Note that the "reason" to attack a compound full of children was "someone heard automatic weapons fire". Any real good Halo player can make a perfectly legal semi-auto rifle sound like a full auto. I know I can. With a "Hellfire" trigger cam? Duh. That's what it's for. To make noise. A "hellfire" makes it near impossible to hit anything, or even aim worth a darn.
Bear in mind I'm not a fan of the Branch Davidians, nor on their side in any way other than as a defender of the right of freedom of religion. And the Truth. The BATF lied over and over, and that Wiki page has a lot of.... doubtful info. There was a heck of a whitewash after and I don't know all the facts....except that more than 70 people are dead.
Sifo, if you want "fun with graphs" look up unemployment stats and note the change after Obama's nomination.
Also pay attention to the "reclassification" of the statistics as this admin takes people off the "unemployed" list ( hundreds of thousands at a time..... more than once ) and changed the reported "percentage" of unemployed down on at least two occasions when it actually went up.
"Figures don't Lie, but liars figure like crazy" My Dad. |
Drkside79
| | Posted on Saturday, December 10, 2011 - 02:34 am: |
|
Hoot did you miss the one from yesterday |
Blake
| | Posted on Saturday, December 10, 2011 - 04:26 am: |
|
I think the issue raised was frequency of front page headlines proclaiming death tolls. How many of the above were front page? None, they were page 10, 12, and 20.
You've lost the point I think. |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Sunday, December 11, 2011 - 10:13 am: |
|
I've always thought the Army's involvement was a conspiracy theory. Not much call for armored tear gas injectors in modern warfare. Police might have need of such a thing. I'd think the Army would have more lethal equipment and would just drop a few shells from 75 miles away.
I've seen 'documentaries' (my duty section leader was a little...off) about Waco. Lots of damning, and believable, evidence that ATF was shooting their own guys during the raid in friendly fire incidents. The Davidians were blamed. They showed the tear gas injectors breaching the walls, and claimed it was the Army. If the Army was called in to raid a meth lab, why isn't the midwest crawling with tanks, mowing down trailer parks and seedy motels? |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Thursday, December 15, 2011 - 08:23 am: |
|
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/15/americ ans-face-guantanamo-detention-obama
The law applies to anyone "who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaida, the Taliban or associated forces".
Ok, that seems reasonable. How hard is it to redefine ME that way? Returning Vets? Tea Party?
Duration of hostilities? Indefinite.
I'm just a teeny bit concerned with the concepts of indefinite detention without trial, ever.
Because this "war" is not going to end without a major change.
Lets face it, the idiotic names "War on Terror" "Human caused Disasters" etc. that our feckless leaders use to avoid ( for various reasons ) declaring that militant theocracy is our enemy makes it all too easy to make anyone a "potential" enemy. Especially if you are the President and your approval rating is below even.
http://www.infowars.com/indefinite-detention-bill- heads-to-obamas-desk/ |
|
