November 7, 2006 at 10:39 AM #7859adminKeymaster
I thought this was very interesting when I read it in the UT yesterday, that the Military Times (publisher of Army Times, AF Times, etc..) just published a scathing editorial calling for the firing of Rumsfeld for mishandling the war.
For those on this board that are Bush and Iraq apologists, I also found it fascinating some of the posts on the Military Times blog site http://www.militarycity.com/discussions/
There are already over 3000 posts. Based on my quick review, the vast majority of the posts agree with the editorial and are very critical of the war, Bush and Rumsfeld.November 7, 2006 at 10:47 AM #39397BugsParticipant
Those papers are published by the Gannet Company, which also publishes USA TodayNovember 7, 2006 at 10:59 AM #39398AnonymousGuest
Yes, and Gannet is supposedly a “liberal” media company so this is certainly a political statement. It is amazing to me that they would make such a strong statement like this given the readership of Military times is generally right wing and they risk losing readership. However, I appluad them for showing some guts and making a statment like this, I think it is awesome.November 7, 2006 at 11:01 AM #39399La Jolla RenterParticipant
Does that mean the Military Times is just another part of the Liberal Media Machine?November 7, 2006 at 12:24 PM #39414MHParticipant
As a Marine, I’d disagree. My opinions WRT the SecDef or POTUS policy aside, I just don’t think a paper that is generally designed for a military audience ought to be picking sides.
Our roles and responsibilities are well spelled out in Title 10 (et al)… we work for the Executive branch including those political appointees properly appointed. In our ranks we have Republicans, Democrats, and a wide variety of Independents; our place is NOT to advocate for any party or group.
That is not in any way to imply I can’t have my own opinions or spend my off-duty hours in the same manner as my civilian counterparts – but it does mean I can’t represent both a political point of view AND my service simultaneously…. I can’t wear my uniform to a political rally, e.g. Along those lines, it would be inappropriate for the Marine Corps Association (et al) to vocally advocate for any political party regardless of whether those feelings are (or are not) privately shared by service members.
What’s next? Perhaps the Marine Times should call for the resignation of Gen Pace too? And Gen Hagee, while we’re at it? Might as well take on the VP too.
Again, please don’t take this to imply that I’d want to muzzle the media – but just think that publications with somewhat special status w/in the DoD (the Marine Times, e.g., can be found at the check-out counter of every MWR activity and most ready rooms / common areas) need to stay apolitical to preserve that appearance of impartiality.November 7, 2006 at 12:48 PM #39415AnonymousGuest
It is certainly unprecedented for the Military Times to editorialize to this degree. I agree that the timing makes it clearly a political move. However, if you take away the timing (right before elections) and they came out with the same editorial 6 months ago, I don’t think it would be as bad.
Regardless, given that Iraq is such an obvious clusterf@#&k, I am elated that such an influential publication, that is part of the military fabric, is willing to take a risk to hold someone accountable for this mess. I say, why did they wait so long?
The military members themselves have no ability to voice their opinions. Public criticism of your chain of command will get you in trouble and/or fired. Private criticism is discouraged due to the military culture, unless the President is a liberal.
MH, you know damn well that the military is not apolitical (although it should be in a perfect world). In reality the military culture is EXTREMELY biased towards Republicans and Conservative thinking. For those of you who haven’t served, just imagine the bias of Fox news, the military is worse.November 7, 2006 at 1:06 PM #39417JESParticipant
I understand your argument, but I disagree that the Marine Times and all the others should stay apolitical to the extent that they have no opinions or leanings on any of the major issues facing our nation, or our military. In order for them to express their opinions in print, they have no choice but to risk the appearance that they are politically motivated. Also, they are private papers and if we truly believe in freedom of the press we cannot put restrictions like the ones you propose on them.
In contrast, base newspapers like the Camp Pendleton Scout are essentially mouthpieces for the base commanding generals and you will never see them disagree with base policies. They strive to be apolitical as they are an extension of the command that should also be also be apolitical. I would argue that our troops need papers like The Marine Times to serve as a voice for issues that base papers will not tackle and local and national papers do not understand. Whether it be body armour, anthrax shots or Rumsfeld, these papers serve an essential purpose and need to have the freedom to report issues in their entirety.
I should also say that I believe they lost some credibility by putting this piece out just before the election. They need the freedom to tackle issues that could be perceived as political, but in order to not risk losing their audience they should be clear that they are not polictically motivated. At this point, demanding that the SecDef resign is a non partison issue.November 7, 2006 at 3:58 PM #39446
Typical leftist crap. No signature, no reference to any source, cheap
slander. Check the Military Times editorial about the bombing of the
Chinese Embassy in the former Yugoslavia by Wesley Clark and his brilliant military gang. Surprise, no editorial. Did they have any opinion
over the rapid military technology sales to China after that “incident”?
No, it was just a “coincidence”. Obviously “opinion” means, slanderous
writings of “brave”, nameless, spineless cockroaches against Republicans.
L ThekNovember 7, 2006 at 4:44 PM #39450blahblahblahParticipant
L Thek, that’s quite a powerful debate technique, calling folks you don’t agree with “cockroaches”. As I recall, this was also popular in Rwanda back in 1993 and 1994. The Hutu radio stations used to broadcast propaganda labeling the Tutsi minority “cockroaches” before they eventually broadcast orders to their listeners to go out and exterminate as many as they could.
Don’t take my word for it, you can read about it here… Or just watch the excellent “Hotel Rwanda”, which features great performances from Don Cheadle and Nick Nolte.November 7, 2006 at 5:04 PM #39453
I signed my comment. If someone needs my phone number, I’ll e-mail it. If the writer of that piece of editorial has any problem with calling him a cockroach, sign his editorial, and I’ll call him Mr. X. Y. Name.
L ThekNovember 7, 2006 at 5:07 PM #39454AnonymousGuest
L Thek, how can you possibly compare the Chinese Embassy bombing to Iraq? Do you have no concept of magnitude? How many Americans were killed because of that incident? How many have been killed in Iraq?
Just go ahead and keep smoking whatever it is your smoking. I’ll take General Clark over any of those A-holes in the Bush administration anyday.November 7, 2006 at 6:59 PM #39461gold_dredger_phdParticipant
What does this have to do with San Diego real estate? Take this rubbish to another blog. If I wanted to hear about politics, I would watch the evening news.November 7, 2006 at 7:37 PM #39462
“L Thek, how can you possibly compare the Chinese Embassy bombing to Iraq?”
You just proved my point. To avoid the bombing of the Chinese
Embassy, your heroes should only check the correct address in
the phone book, but they blew it. The war in Iraq is for the future
of Western Civiliztion. If the U.S. blows it, you don’t have to worry
about real estate values anymore.
L ThekNovember 7, 2006 at 7:39 PM #39463
“What does this have to do with San Diego real estate?”
Think about the previous post…
L ThekNovember 7, 2006 at 8:30 PM #39465AnonymousGuest
I agree with you wholeheartedly, L_T_E.
Is ‘L_T_E’ to evoke ‘health economics’? Is that the arena that you work in?
G_D_Ph.D., what’s your Ph.D. (candidacy?) in?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.