Appreciate the offer.
However, no need. My info comes directly from those who have been there -- good and bad.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Harry in Afghanistan.
- Thread starter scotthayes
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
However, no need. My info comes directly from those who have been there -- good and bad.
You say this as if it wouldn't happen. I'm confident, someone in the "British press" would leak that story if it existed. No doubt about it.
It's been a decade or more since the "press" took responsibility in their reporting. On this we can agree. Where we probably disagree is your assertion that this problem is limited only to American press that happens to be conservative. There is a whole lot of garbage out there being printed that should have been held until a more appropriate time. In days gone by, the press was much more positive because rather than instantly splashing whatever tripe they had they would actually work for positive change. Now it's just about being first to push it out on every media they can. Every day the news is more and more about the press than it is about the things they are covering.
The press is definitely out of control, and anyone that breaks silence on ANY secret military event of their country or an ally is plain disgusting. Even if it is about a "celebrity".
3. Are you sure as an American you want to lecture the world on committing and Act Of War on another sovereign state
This is hilariously ironic considering Englands military history.
This boils down to the question of what the media is about. Are they telling me what is going on, or what someone else has deemed it appropriate for me to know....
The press is definitely out of control, and anyone that breaks silence on ANY secret military event of their country or an ally is plain disgusting. Even if it is about a "celebrity".
We taught you well.
Yes, however, when it was more difficult to become "press" due to the difficulties in distributing your content, those that managed to do so tended to have a much better regard for what is appropriate. Now that any shmuck can publish to thousands of people in instants, there is no filter whatsoever. Of course, having a filter is an issue as the filter could be suspect.
But there is no way anyone can ever win a war in an environment when your own press is telling the enemy what you are doing. Especially when they do so for no good reason other than to "be first to press". I'm sorry, but knowing Harry's whereabouts was not "appropriate" nor necessary and revealing them served no purpose that is honorable or patriotic. This is true about many of the things that are printed in regards to military actions.
The terrorists certainly understand our press and can certainly use it to their advantage. That has been proven time and time again.
All that wealth and privilege, the finest education and he wants to join the army like some poorly educated no hoper off an estate. Genius. While there's people stupid enough to join the army there are going to be those behind the scenes itching to give "the lads" something to do. It's an unjust war being fought for by misguided people who have been lied to.
Equally, I'm sure that this isn't a precedent and so what else have the media colluded with the government on? The real reason for the war is one I'd suggest.
Equally, I'm sure that this isn't a precedent and so what else have the media colluded with the government on? The real reason for the war is one I'd suggest.
You are aware this war is being fought in Afghanistan? Our reasons for being there are certainly more just than if you look across in the direction of Basra.
Sandhurst is not populated by and large with "poorly educated no hopers". They may have lived on an estate, though not the kind you are thinking of. There is a centuries-long tradition of the younger sons of noble families joining the armed forces, and every son of a monarch usually enrols at some point. Charles, Anne and Andrew all did (though Edward didn't really take to the Marines very successfully). They are, after all, "Her Majesty's Armed Forces". I'm certainly happier that he was in Afghanistan rather than participating in the clusterf*ck that is Iraq.
Everything you say is true it's that I'm a bit surprised that he hasn't encountered someone along the way that hasn't ignited in him a spark to do something else. Especially as he is the son of Diana who campaigned for humanitarian causes like ridding the world of anti-personnel devices. It isn't too far fetched to think that he may be asked to set them rather than clear them. With this presence in his life which is "pro life" it seem odd to have chosen a career which is "anti -life"
Could you summarise why Tony Bliar decided to take the UK to war with Afghanistan? What occurred to make him decide that a particular action by an Afghani meant war had to be declared and the situation could not be resolved by any other means?
Unlike the US, the UK has unequivocally renounced the use of landmines:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/142807.stm
Some people actually understand that sometimes you have to be aggressive in order to be successful in your defense. Those that don't are purged from society eventually.
I really have nothing against pacifists. Unfortunately, much like vegetarians, they can't seem to be happy only with the fact that they are doing what they think is right, but so many feel the need to close their minds to the possibility that someone doing something else might be doing what is right as well and that they are the only ones that "really" know what's going on. Close minded, know-it-all, bossy, holier-than-thou, unrealistic, naive, and ill-informed platitudes, impress me not.
Moving along.
Good. I hadn't heard of that. But the essence is still the same ... it's a destructive path he's chosen.
His reasoning may not convince you, but at least the Taleban were/are actually operating in Afghanistan.
Ultimately, however, war reflects a failure of diplomacy and a failure of imagination.
...as long as they don't stand in your line of fire, eh?
Well, they can't both be right, can they? In either case.
You have nothing against pacifists, did you say?
Saltyzoo I think it's you who are the one with the bunkered mind. I've asked questions, haven't been insulting and have kept my tone on an even keel.
Much Ado ... the Taliban exists is your sole purpose for war? The Taliban that the SAS trained and the Americans gave billions in aid, training and weapons to illegally? The same Taliban that the US government and UNOCAL and Enron tried to do business with for oil?
Much Ado ... the Taliban exists is your sole purpose for war? The Taliban that the SAS trained and the Americans gave billions in aid, training and weapons to illegally? The same Taliban that the US government and UNOCAL and Enron tried to do business with for oil?
Many good things are happening that unfortunately, the press does not report.
Also, there are some (not many) shortcomings that are not reported. It seems the press around the world focuses on the negative rather than the positive. Just look at your evening news channel.
Anyhow, Iraq & Afghanistan are large countries. Unfortunately, we do not see all that goes on in either place.
I have anecdotal evidence from family and friends who've been there as well. I just figured verifiable proof from those commanders on the ground Bush keeps saying he's listening to even though he isn't would be better. We pulled resources from the 'stans where the real enemies were to create more chaos in Iraq. I keep reading articles about how we're dropping the ball in Afghanistan, and how Bin Laden is still out there, and wondering why my cousin and best friend had to be sent to Iraq before we finished what we started in Afghanistan.
All the good we're supposedly doing doesn't change how badly we've screwed up in the 'stans, and how bad things are in Iraq.