How accurate are the news reports?

Status
Not open for further replies.
And the foreign press... Interesting that the Guardian, a left paper prints this.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1185792,00.html
----------------------------------------------------------
Iraqi polls bring secular success

Jonathan Steele in Nassiriya
Monday April 5, 2004
The Guardian

Herded into lines by inexperienced police officers, hundreds of would-be Iraqi voters pushed into a sparsely equipped school at the weekend to cast their ballots for the local council of Tar.
Deep in the marshlands of the Euphrates, the town of 15,000 people was the first to rise against Saddam Hussein in the abortive intifada of 1991. Now it was holding the first genuine election in its history.

The poll was the latest in a series which this overwhelmingly Shia province has held in the past six weeks, and the results have been surprising. Seventeen towns have voted, and in almost every case secular independents and representatives of non-religious parties did better than the Islamists.

This week sees the biggest event in the Shia calendar, the annual pilgrimage to the holy cities of Kerbala and Najaf, and thousands of people were making the 10-day walk along the main road west through Nassiriya and its surrounding province of Dhi Qar. But in the march to the polling booths the secular democrats were showing the greater strength.

"This is a free election," said Jawad Khadum, a teacher in Tar. "We want more of them, for example in our teachers' union and for the mayor."

Like many professionals, he was worried by the way some religious parties had been throwing their weight around, trying to close shops which sell alcohol and pressing every woman to wear a veil. He saw the vote as a chance to stop this, he said.

The results will have delighted him. Neither of the two Islamist candidates was among the 10 elected. A woman teacher got in, the first female councillor in the province. Other winners included an agricultural engineer and three businessmen.

In Shatra, a town of 250,000, the Communist party won four seats and independents seven. Partly because of their popularity for stopping the looting which followed the overthrow of the old regime, the Islamists had a majority in the former council which was appointed last summer. After the election they were cut back to four seats out of 15.

"It was not a surprise," said Jalil Abed Jafar, a doctor, in the Communist party's upstairs offices along the waterfront. Shatra is where the party was founded 70 years ago, and the offices were still full of posters celebrating that event, along with photographs of dozens of members executed by the former regime.

No other province has held as many elections as Dhi Qar.

They have been organised largely by Tobin Bradley, an Arabic-speaking US state department official attached to the occupation authority in Nassiriya. Although the American government insisted that national elections could not be held in Iraq before the transfer of sovereignty on June 30, in Dhi Qar they went ahead using the ration card system - a method which could have been used nationally, according to many Iraqis.

The system of cheap basic rations still operates, and every Iraqi family received new cards this year, listing address and family size. In the Dhi Qar elections the card allowed a husband and wife to vote if they also brought their identity documents. The ration card was stamped in red or blue for each gender, making it possible for a wife to come earlier or later than her husband.

"It's not universal suffrage," said Mr Bradley, as he watched local judges check voters' identities inside the school entrance in Tar. "The polling places are only in the town centre. Some families are larger than others and they all get two votes. But it's free and fair to a certain degree."

Direct elections are not being held for the provincial council, but Mr Bradley has organised partial contests. A certain number of seats is set aside for various groups, which then elect people to fill them.

The province has 22 Islamic parties, which will get six seats. The 15 secular parties get four. Seats are reserved for women, professional associations and trade unions. Seven seats are for 54 tribal leaders. The "refreshed council", as it is called, is claimed to be more democratic than the one appointed by the occupation authorities.

"We chose people not very transparently before," Mr Bradley said. "This time we said, 'you provide the names'."

The change cannot come soon enough, in the view of Sheikh Sabri Hamid al-Rumidh, Dhi Qar's governor, who has been battling to control the religious parties, particularly the half-dozen which have militias.

Like the voters in the province's unprecedented elections, Mr Rumidh hopes the tide which flowed in favour of the religious parties in 2003 has begun to turn.
 
I look at most news stories about Iraq only as separate threads in an overall story. Trying to put all the info together for an accurate picture is tough. I think most of the major networks with reporters on site try to do a good job. I did not believe the "embedded" reports at all as this was just military controlled news. How this war turns out will ultimately be about it's reality over time and I do not think we should be spoon fed good news just to keep us sending troops and money. The fact that leaves have been cancelled and deployments increased means this is a serious setback. Americans have a great resolve when they understand the reality. The reasons for this war are now showing the American public that maybe, just maybe, we bit off more than we wanted to chew as we've been conditioned to expect short wars with easy, few or no casualties. If we were told from the beginning that this could take 10 years $100 billion+ and a continuing count of dead US soldiers, and that Iraq was not an "imminent threat", I think the public would have made a different decision. As for the parallels to Vietnam I think we are in a much bigger hole to dig out of in Iraq. If we fail we will loose an entire region as well as any future support from the rest of the world. The Tet Offensive was a defeat for the ARVN but the American public had been lied to so much prior to Tet that we were fed up and not willing to send more soldiers to die for more lies. We would also have had (I think)a continuing gorilla war with years of occupation, not a clean go home victory. That's why telling the truth from the beginning is so important if you need a sustaining committment.
 
quote:

Originally posted by labman:
Besides, the dirty little secret of the bias of the news is out. I don't think people will ever trust anybody the way they did Cronkite.

yeah, too many alternative sources now. Cronkite at least had the appearance of objectivity, much more so than the current crop of network anchors, but since his retirement his speeches and statements show him to be firmly in the commie/socialist camp.
 
Needtoknow:
"The Tet Offensive was a defeat for the ARVN but the American public had been lied to so much prior to Tet that we were fed up and not willing to send more soldiers to die for more lies. We would also have had (I think)a continuing gorilla war with years of occupation, not a clean go home victory. That's why telling the truth from the beginning is so important if you need a sustaining committment."

Mind explaining how it was a defeat for ARVN when the VC were essentially wiped out?? The rest of your paragraph is pretty much also bunk. Please note though, that if the US public was lied to, it was by Democrats.

The fact is, as was pointed out, the "Easter Offensive" in 1972 was a decisive defeat for the NVA. The problem was, that by 1975, the Democratically controlled Congress cut foreign aid to South VN to the point where they were reduced to rationing ammo to 20 rounds and one granade per month per soldier.

The freighters kept unloading in North VN though, and the NVA ended up using more tanks and armor force vehicles then the Germans did in 1940 to overrun France.

The fact is, is that the Democrats are so power mad that they could not allow the Republicans to win the war in VN cause of how it would reflect on the Democrats who got us into the war and bumbled it. They are perfectly prepared to sacrifice our troops lives in Iraq now in order to regain power. Witness Ted kenndy's comments over what is essentially a small upheaval in Iraq.
 
I think Cronkite/TV news was the start of swaying the public with "news" in the 60's.......I think up to this point USA people were more inward or I guess not as exposed to the world....suddenly the TV brings the world into the living room and the TV executives KNOW they been "granted" some power to shape views.....imagine it's taken 40 years+ and people are waking up. Maybe the WEB helped.....
 
Eric,
My mistake about misuse of ARVN. I'm not defending Democrats on Vietnam, they got us there. Here's two separate views on Tet.

Tet Offensive
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The leadership decided to concentrate on a few high profile operations, that would take place in the public (and the US media) eye rather than fighting the conflict away from major urban centers. This would bolster Northern morale, possibly inspire uprisings in the South and provide the impression, and hopefully the reality, that the US/ARVN were not winning the war and it was likely to be a long time before they did. The new policy also marked a victory for the 'hawks' over the 'doves' in the Communist Party leadership, and in late 1967 around 200 senior officials of the latter variety were purged.

One of the reasons this strategy was so effective was that US leaders were at best misleading, and at worst, lying outright to the American public about what was going on in Vietnam. This has subsequently been admitted by people such as the Secretary of Defense at the time, Robert McNamara, as well as other high US officials, and there is plenty of evidence of this in the form of documents, audio recordings, et cetera. At the beginning of 1968, Americans had been led to believe that the NLF and North Vietnamese were on the verge of defeat, and that the US would soon win the war. This impression has been credited to the activities of President Johnson and Secretary McNamara, who concealed information about the real situation in Vietnam. The Tet Offensive belied the previously held thought that the North would be easily defeated, and is one of the reasons many Americans lost confidence in the government. A group of prominent LBJ advisors, known as the "Wise Men," also turned against direct American involvement in Vietnam after Tet.

Edwin E. Moïse
The Vietnam Wars, Section 8
The Tet Offensive and its Aftermath

The Tet Offensive was militarily a defeat for the Communists; it had weakened them very substantially. However, in public relations it was a Communist victory. There were several reasons for this.

1) The most important was the way the optimistic statements US spokesmen had been making about Communist weakness contrasted with the strength the Communists had shown in this battle. US spokesmen had been saying for months that the Communist forces were weakening. The Tet Offensive made it obvious that the Communist forces were far stronger than US spokesmen had admitted. When the same spokesmen said after the Tet Offensive that the Communists had been badly weakened, they were telling the truth for a change, but they had a lot of trouble persuading anyone to believe them. When General Westmoreland, the US commander in Vietnam, asked for 200,000 more American soldiers to be sent to Vietnam, this made people even less willing to believe that the Tet Offensive had been a brilliant American victory.

2) The Tet Offensive made the brutality of the war very visible to Americans. The US Air Force had been bombing South Vietnamese villages for years; during Tet the Air Force was bombing South Vietnamese cities. The ARVN had been killing prisoners for years;
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom