Is it fair?

[Paco]

The odd fact about the American media in this war is that it's not covering the American military. The most plugged-in nation in the world is receiving virtually no true information about what its warriors are doing.

Oh, sure, there's a body count. We know how many Americans have fallen. And we see those same casket pictures day in and day out. And we're almost on a first-name basis with the pukes who abused the Iraqi prisoners. And we know all about improvised explosive devices and how we lost Fallujah and what Arab public-opinion polls say about us and how the world hates us.

We get a non-stop feed of gloom and doom.

But we don't hear about the heroes.

The incredibly brave GIs who honorably do their duty. The ones our grandparents would have carried on their shoulders down Fifth Avenue.

The ones we completely ignore.

Like Brian Chontosh.

It was a year ago on the march into Baghdad. Brian Chontosh was a platoon leader rolling up Highway 1 in a humvee.

When all hell broke loose.

Ambush city.

The young Marines were being cut to ribbons. Mortars, machine guns, rocket propelled grenades. And the id out of Churchville was in charge. It was do or die and it was up to him.

So he moved to the side of his column, looking for a way to lead his men to safety. As he tried to poke a hole through the Iraqi line his humvee came under direct enemy machine gun fire.

It was fish in a barrel and the Marines were the fish.

And Brian Chontosh gave the order to attack. He told his driver to floor the humvee directly at the machine gun emplacement that was firing at them. And he had the guy on top with the .50 cal unload on them.

Within moments there were Iraqis slumped across the machine gun and Chontosh was still advancing, ordering his driver now to take the humvee directly into the Iraqi trench that was attacking his Marines. Over into the battlement the humvee went and out the door Brian Chontosh bailed, carrying an M16 and a Beretta and 228 years of Marine Corps pride.

And he ran down the trench.

With its mortars and riflemen, machineguns and grenadiers.

And he killed them all.

He fought with the M16 until he was out of ammo. Then he fought with the Beretta until it was out of ammo. Then he picked up a dead man's AK47 and fought with that until it was out of ammo. Then he picked up another dead man's AK47 and fought with that until it was out of ammo.

At one point he even fired a discarded Iraqi RPG into an enemy cluster, sending attackers flying with its grenade explosion.

When he was done Brian Chontosh had cleared 200 yards of entrenched Iraqis from his platoon's flank. He had killed more than 20 and wounded at least as many more.

But that's probably not how he would tell it.

He would probably merely say that his Marines were in trouble, and he got them out of trouble. Hoo-ah, and drive on.

"By his outstanding display of decisive leadership, unlimited courage in the face of heavy enemy fire, and utmost devotion to duty, 1st Lt. Chontosh reflected great credit upon himself and upheld the highest traditions of the Marine Corps and the United States Naval Service."

That's what the citation says.

And that's what nobody will hear.

That's what doesn't seem to be making the evening news. Accounts of American valor are dismissed by the press as propaganda, yet accounts of American difficulties are heralded as objectivity. It makes you wonder if the role of the media is to inform, or to depress - to report or to deride. To tell the truth, or to feed us lies.

But I guess it doesn't matter.

We're going to turn out all right.

As long as men like Brian Chontosh wear our uniform.

No wonder "the world" sees us as the bad guys. It's just not fair is it? One U.S. Marine against more than 40 middle easterners. That unfair advantage we have just makes us look like bullies.

 

[Rick van Opbergen]

I thought mainstream US media always paid more than enough attention to the US military - I always recall CNN at the beginning of the war, they acted like it was some sort of exiting play. But anyway, don't you just hate this war?

 

[Reverend Blair]

The world sees the US as the bad guys because they've started an illegal war, showed no regard for the lives and well-being trapped in that war, and have committed war crime after war crime. They have used at leat two banned weapons, depleted uranium and napalm, and the very real possibility that they have used poisonous gas in Fallujah has been rumoured in several places.

The reason why the US has such a bad reputation on the world stage is because they have worked very hard to earn that bad reputation. It's unfortunate that reputation is being applied to all Americans, including members of the armed forces, but the fact remains that the US is acting like a rogue nation and committing atrocities on an almost daily basis.

Don't like when people point out that you are war criminals? Then quit committing war crimes.

 

[Rick van Opbergen]

On the other hand though, Rev, why are we than less focusing on countries like Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Russia, Libya, Colombia, Belarus, North Korea, China, Pakistan, Cuba and Algeria, where crimes against humanity are committed on a fairly daily basis? To what extent can we focus on the US because of the reason it's a powerful nation thus more dangerous (according to the rhetoric), while the same could be said of China?

 

[Andem]

Re: RE: Is it fair?

On the other hand though, Rev, why are we than less focusing on countries like Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Russia, Libya, Colombia, Belarus, North Korea, China, Pakistan, Cuba and Algeria, where crimes against humanity are committed on a fairly daily basis? To what extent can we focus on the US because of the reason it's a powerful nation thus more dangerous (according to the rhetoric), while the same could be said of China?

Because a) The US doesn't have the 'power' to invade or attack these countries. It doesn't make business sense, since an invasion of these countries would undermine their markets.

The US uses these so-called "moral" reasons of invasion just to get the support of certain groups. You actually think they invaded Iraq to remove a dictator? Corporate bigwigs couldn't care less about the well-being of non-Americans or even Americans for that matter.

Just remember, Bush is one of those corporate bigwigs.

 

[ElPolaco]

...and don't forget about the whole history of the US's support of worldwide "democracy" since ww2. Pro-US anti-communist representatives of "freedom" such as Pinochet, Trujillo, Somoza, Mobutu, Castillo-Armas, the Greek colonels...

 

[Reverend Blair]

I'm glad you brought up all of those other countries, Rick. My e-mail is a constant stream of press releases from the United Nations, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and Reporters Without Borders.

All of the countries you mentioned and quite a few more get regular mention in these press releases. Most of these releases are very diplomatically worded so as not to offend any major powers.

Something that becomes very clear when you start looking at all of things as a group is the extent that the United States is involved in all of these countries, how their policies are shaped by corporate interrests, and how willing they are to back the wrong team...to overthrow, ignore or undermine democratic movements and human rights when it suits their corporate policies.

Especially, but not only, under Republican presidents the United States has been involved in what is best described as a war on democracy fo a very long time now. When you start digging around for cause and effect and looking back in history, the situation actually gets to be quite frightening.

 

[passpatoo]

I think that the stories of events such as Brian Chontosh are dismissed as propaganda because it is propaganda. Assuming that the story is true (it is rather fantastical), it contains no discussion of the reasons for the US armed forces being in the country in the first place, the mistakes that were made in the preparation for the invasion despite cautions from high ranking knowledgable military leaders, the benifit gained from senior government officials as a result of the invasion, lack of world approval for the invasion, and so many other reasons as posted in this same thread and can be found elswhere.

The story, as reported, does nothing but glorify killing, which has no real journalistic merit in my opinion. I'm surprised that the story didn't also report the soldier getting the girl in the end then riding off into the sunset with her.

I have high regard for the people who choose to defend thier country, make no mistake. But journalists have to ask the bigger question: Would Brian Chontosh have had to act in such a "courageous" manner if his president had not started an illegal war?

 

[Reverend Blair]

That's a question for the non-embedded press though, Passpatoo. The embedded press is just there to give a play by play...they might as well be sports writers cheering on the home team.

 

[passpatoo]

Agreed.

 

[Rick van Opbergen]

Something that becomes very clear when you start looking at all of things as a group is the extent that the United States is involved in all of these countries, how their policies are shaped by corporate interrests, and how willing they are to back the wrong team...to overthrow, ignore or undermine democratic movements and human rights when it suits their corporate policies.

1) To what extent is that true? ; 2) Is it merely the US which has corporate interests to such extent that it ignores the human rights situation, or are there also a lot of other countries doing the exact same thing?

What are the US interests in North Korea, to give an example?

 

[Reverend Blair]

US interests in North Korea are called South Korea.

1) To what extent is that true?

Pay particular attention to any place where there are energy resources, Rick. The US is in there like a dirty shirt. They do the same for mining interests in South America and Africa. The use aid as an excuse to force their pharmaceuticals and GM crops on developing nations, especially in Africa. Oil is the big one though...it's what makes the world go 'round.

To what extent is it true? Do the research...the US is neck deep on dirty tricks all over the world. They support dictators, back coups, pull or give aid, wage secret wars, fund militias and so on.

2) Is it merely the US which has corporate interests to such extent that it ignores the human rights situation, or are there also a lot of other countries doing the exact same thing?

Other countries do the same, France being a dandy example in Africa and Russia in what used to be the old USSR, but not to the same extent or with the impunity that the US does. Oddly enough when a country besides the USA is practicing imperialism someplace, the US is generally in the area as well.

Here's an interesting project for you. Pick an example of non-US imperialism or a human rights issue in the developing world and research it. Look into the history and the causes and what's going on in neighbouring nations that have an effect. It won't take long until you start finding references to US corporations and the CIA. It never does.

 

[Rick van Opbergen]

My point is Rev that this all sounds utterly vague. I do not deny that the US is involved in several parts of the world, but I wonder to what extent that is (are they just bystanders benefiting from some advantages, or deeply involved?).

 

[Reverend Blair]

It depends on the part of the world and what they are doing there. Look at Colombia. The US has some troops there, employs a lot of "advisors" on contract to work with the Colombian military, provides funding and training for para-military groups and so on.

They say that it is part of the "War on Drugs," which would be pretty questionable anyway, but a lot of US effort goes into protecting an oil pipline that just happens to be owned by people with connections to the Bush family.

That's not too vague.

Other cases are though. The US has backed Islam Karimov in Uzbekistan in spite of a lot of evidence that Karimov is fond of doing things like boiling people alive for doing things like printing the truth in newspapers or going to mosque.

Karimov is a bit of an embarrassment lately because the mainstream British press went after the British government for being involved with him. The US backed off a bit...their support of Karimov is no longer so public. He still gets funding as part of the coalition of the bribed and bullied though.

Like I said, pick a subject and research it. Do something on Rwanda or small arms sales in developing world or child labour or the AIDS pandemic or a civil war in South America or a trade issue, or, or, or...

The US pops up in almost everything in one way or another. Usually in a questionable light. Usually having to do with protecting the assets of US-owned corporations.

 

[grimy]

The US has backed Islam Karimov in Uzbekistan in spite of a lot of evidence that Karimov is fond of doing things like boiling people alive for doing things like printing the truth in newspapers or going to mosque.

Gee, that sounds not unlike the French and Russian support of Idi Amin who was well known for eating you as quick as look at you. So what?

Haven't you figured out yet that the world is as small a place as it is big ? Haven't you figured out yet that if you're the Pres/PM of an influential country it sometimes has to make deals with the devil.

You ***OBSCENE ATTACK DELETED*** Could that be why you're branded Idealists? There clearly is no lack of brainpower here; what is lacking however is the willingness to put it to good use and stop harping about your losses from the sidelines and get involved - make a difference, if you think you can. ***PERSONAL ATTACK DELETED****. I suspect it applies to a good number of posters here too.

If I've upset the lefty apple cart and am doomed to be banned for speaking my mind - then that speaks wonders doesn't it?

c'est la vie. . . .

 

[Reverend Blair]

Forgot to say...it was me who edited out Grimy's obscenities and personal attack.

 

[Paco]

Re: RE: Is it fair?

Forgot to say...it was me who edited out Grimy's obscenities and personal attack.

"Skank for me Condi" ???

That is not a political statement. It is an obscene and offensive attack.

Why don't you edit your own signature?

 

[Reverend Blair]

It's a line from a song, Paco...a love song from Steve Earle to Condaleeza Rice, more or less ;-). You should go to your nearest music store and purchase a copy of Steve Earle's "The Revolution Starts Now." You'll like it.