2007-08-29 05:06:02 · 30 answers · asked by American citizen and taxpayer 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Anybody who has actually been 'outside the wire.'
try the guy below. He is writing about what he sees.
Whatever you do - ignore CNN. We had CNN running 24/7 in our TOC and we could compare what they were saying to actual 'ground truth.' They would repeat enemy propaganda - and when we confronted them on it and showed them the truth of the matter, they never corrected their stories.
2007-08-29 05:12:30 · answer #1 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Read anything and everything written by Thomas L. Friedman.
He is a 3 time Pulitzer Prize winning author on the Middle East.
He gives you a very unbiased view of what it is like on the ground and how things really work.
Interestingly enough he thinks that the US should be in Iraq.
Whoa! someone who has won the Pulitzer Prize 3 different times thinks the US is helping the Middle East by being in Iraq?? Say it aint so oh my liberal heart hahaha.
Check out his works...Thomas L. Friedman is his name.
2007-08-29 12:16:47 · answer #2 · answered by h h 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The best way to find out what is really happening in Iraq is to read both sides and determine which is more convincing. Anti-War.com is probably the best on the anti-war side. If you're looking for pro-war sources, National Review is a particularly extreme pro-war publication, but most of the mainstream media can give you the War Party line as well.
2007-08-29 12:14:20 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
You've got next to no chance- people only get unbiased in their assesment of a given event long after the fact, a which point you have the problem of trying to work out what evidence is reliable and what isn't. Your best bet is to look at the history of the area and try to work out from there why things going on today actually are.
"The facts, like anything, came down to a matter of opinion"-Douglas Adams
2007-08-29 12:12:20 · answer #4 · answered by miserable old git 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Among the least biased news sources are:
MSNBC
Christian Science Monitor
USA Today
Breitbart
I recommend News Prism, which shows the relative degree of bias for all the major news outlets. That way at least you'll know how much and what kind of bias is in the news you do read, so you can adjust your opinion accordingly.
News Prism also ranks political blogs.
2007-08-29 12:18:34 · answer #5 · answered by dr_gno 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
You won't find any that are TRULY unbiased. This is something that most people don't ride the fence on. I wish there were. It would make sorting this out easier. Did we make mistakes? yes. Was the intelligence bad? Yes. Could we have nipped this in the bud a long time ago? Yes. If you find one, let me know
2007-08-29 12:14:30 · answer #6 · answered by Mr. Cellophane 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What in the world for?
What is the value of a completely unbiased view on any topic?
Are you looking for the truth?
Why? Nobody else is.
"As scarce as truth is, the supply is always greater than the demand".
There, now you have the truth.
2007-08-29 12:22:18 · answer #7 · answered by lunatic 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No such thing as an unbiased source. Everyone has a point of view.
2007-08-29 12:10:12 · answer #8 · answered by anonacoup 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
So some think you should read Arab news...
yep that's unbiased.
Actually you should read it, and liberal news and conservative news too. The more the merrier.
But keep in mind news is news, the fewer adjectives you read the more honest the facts are, if you see unholy warriors, liberal rag head lovers, cut and run Democrats, obdurate Republicans, go elsewhere. Those adjectives can sway your opinion of the facts.
2007-08-29 12:15:24 · answer #9 · answered by justa 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There really aren't any, you have to get your info from at least 4 different sources then make up your own mind as to what the truth could be.
2007-08-29 12:12:35 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
* = From www.iraqbodycount.net (IBC) - (Reuters) - One U.S. soldier died of wounds suffered during combat operations in the vicinity of Kirkuk, 250 km (155 miles) north of Baghdad, on Tuesday, U.S. military said.
(Advertisement)
Following are the latest figures for military deaths in Iraq and Iraqi civilians killed in attacks since the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003:
U.S.-LED COALITION FORCES:
United States 3,733
Britain 168
Other nations 129
IRAQIS:
Military Between 4,900 and 6,375<#/p>
Civilians Between 70,927 and 77,460*
# = Think-tank estimates for military under Saddam Hussein killed during the 2003 war. No reliable official figures have been issued since new security forces were set up in late 2003.
* = From www.iraqbodycount.net (IBC), run by academics and peace activists, based on reports from at least two media sources. The IBC says on its Web site that the figure underestimates the true number of casualties.
The U.S-led military coalition toll includes casualties from Iraq and the surrounding area where troops are stationed
2007-08-29 13:52:47 · answer #11 · answered by conranger1 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋