English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-01-28 00:02:01 · 16 answers · asked by rallman@sbcglobal.net 5 in Politics & Government Military

16 answers

We would be seen as the saviors of Iraq by the media. I guarantee the soldiers killed numbers would not be splashed across the screen everyday like they are now. We would be focusing on all the schools that have been built or reopened, the modern conveniences we have given to the people there and just how heartwarming it all is.

2007-01-28 00:07:59 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5 2

That is a great question. It seems rhetorical in that you are possibly stating that you believe the media to be biased on way or another? Well, if so, you are correct. The media (like anyone) tends to be biased in various degrees. There are a few media outlets that tend to be fairly neutral (CSM, BBC, and some newswire services). But most have a point to make (Fox, CNN, Network news in the US, etc).

So, there would be differences in reporting without a doubt. I would assume that Fox would take a more negative view of the war and CNN would perhaps be more supportive of it (mostly in commentary). It's hard to imagine anyone painting the war in positive light whether or not there were a Dem in the Executive. But anything is possible when it comes to the media.

2007-01-28 00:12:42 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

i am going to't communicate for all Democrats yet i must be elated. the priority appears to be like no one has bothered to outline fulfillment or win for us. we've been advised the project became executed and that Al Qaeda became in its very last throes although the mess maintains unabated. all and sundry is on third rotations to Iraq. Are you advocating 4th and fifth rotations? can we go with a draft to fill in for the cannon fodder being lost each day over there? Frankly i do not provide a rat's in the back of about Iraq. I care about my personal usa, which looks to have various of complications immediately even if we do not contain Dubya's conflict of revenge. per chance if we end that insanity we may be able to commence to concentration on issues that are substantial to our lifestyle and under no circumstances attempt to mould someone into "mini us".

2016-10-16 05:18:44 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Well, if you're one of those people who just watches all the stooges who get on the television and start ranting about their own opinions without putting an ounce of your own thought in, then I'll bet it would be quite different. But if you form your opinions based on things like the death count and actual dialogues between the leaders of our countries then it probably wouldn't change much.

Oh, but wait - there's a global conspiracy that somehow affects every single news station except for Fox in exactly the same way and relays the same erroneous data to all of them, right? Because it's not like that's logistically infeasible or anything. Sorry, for a second there I forgot that Iraq was a happy place with chocolate rivers and singing children with gumdrop smiles.

2007-01-28 00:51:14 · answer #4 · answered by na n 3 · 1 1

With a democrat in office, the left-wing media would be showing all of the good stuff that the
U S Armed Forces are doing in Iraq and less coverage of the car bombs and IEDs and the
rest of the violence that they are showing today.

2007-01-28 00:18:19 · answer #5 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 1 0

It is a civil war that we should stay out of. The people of Iraq will eliminate the terrorists by themselves. No need to worry about weapons of mass destruction, we will find them when they reach the USA.

Disclaimer: Rallman these are not my own personal beliefs just my interpretation of how the liberal media would handle the issue.

2007-01-28 00:38:38 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Victory, which it can be argued has been achieved today.

After all we have achieved our stated goals.....

1. Remove Saddam and Baath Party
2. remove WMD, they were either never there or they were relocated, either way iraq and WMD are no longer a threat
3. install a constutional government democracy

We really have done what we set out to do rather quickly, the was over quickly. we have not yet won the peace. but this is not that important compared to the rest, for America.

The media would be gloryifying this had Clinton done it. funny thing is, there is no chance a liberal would take on islam.

2007-01-28 00:12:35 · answer #7 · answered by American Bad Ass 1 · 4 1

First off, today's democrats don't have the back bone to do what ever the latest poll says in unpopular. But should a democridiot win the house in '08 you will see an entirely different message out of the media. The media is a very predictable outlet. Sad isn't it?

2007-01-28 00:07:30 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4 2

I would imagine not much at all would be said about the war as the right wing would be much more concerned about him being involved in a sex scandal or some other biblically incorrect action.
As you recall with clinton republicans normally attack on things that are none of our business as opposed to things that actually matter and are of some import to the national iterest.

2007-01-28 00:18:41 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I think it would be the same, I know that I think this war is wrong, no matter who was president when it started. It was right to go to Afghanistan, but wrong to go to Iraq. I think that is what public oppinion is also. I think the media takes public oppinion into account when they report the news.

2007-01-28 00:10:02 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 4

fedest.com, questions and answers