Peter Arnett: Revoke his citizenship or-

Discussion in 'Operation Iraqi Freedom' started by TimPoet, Mar 31, 2003.

?

What should be the response for Peter Arnett's comments to the Iraqi press?

  1. Revoke his ten year old citizenship.

    1 vote(s)
    5.9%
  2. Try him for aiding and comforting the enemy on enemy soil.

    8 vote(s)
    47.1%
  3. Show him respect as a good journalist.

    5 vote(s)
    29.4%
  4. None of the above.

    3 vote(s)
    17.6%
  1. TimPoet

    TimPoet digitally confused

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2001
    Messages:
    2,432
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Or here are my other options:
    1. Flog him.
    2. Half-drown him.
    3. Drag him behind a tank in the Iraqi desert.
    4. Embed him with a Marine detachment and let them mete out justice.
    5. All of the above.
    :p
    :D
     
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2003
  2. morriswindgate

    morriswindgate Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2000
    Messages:
    7,761
    Location:
    Bakersfield,CA
    Behind the scenes let it leak that an unnamed reporter has been helping with targeting, afterall any of the western reporters that are in Baghdad are there because the regime can trust them.
     
  3. morriswindgate

    morriswindgate Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2000
    Messages:
    7,761
    Location:
    Bakersfield,CA
    Today Show just announced NBC,MSNBC & National Geographic has "severed" relations with Peter Arnett over his Badad broadcast.
     
  4. Strider

    Strider

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2001
    Messages:
    886
    Location:
    Burb of Detroit, Mi
    Peter Arnett didn't even hesitate on his comments, while yes he's a journalist (A bad one at that) it was his opinions not his journalism that offended me. A jounalist responsiblities are reporting the news, not making it. He should join the Iraq Army, so he can become fair game.
     
  5. TimPoet

    TimPoet digitally confused

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2001
    Messages:
    2,432
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I was thinking about the offer of super gluing him to Saddam Hussein.
     
  6. mairving

    mairving

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 1999
    Messages:
    5,538
    Location:
    Arlington, TN
    Maybe they should reinstate him and let him cover what is happening at Sadaam's palaces ... at night.
     
  7. Hot Rod

    Hot Rod

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2001
    Messages:
    413
    Location:
    Iowa
    He overstepped his bounds as a journalist...and in his case I use that term very loosely. Okay.....he didn't just overstep his bounds. He hop skipped and jumped over it.
     
  8. doctorgonzo

    doctorgonzo Professional gadfly

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2002
    Messages:
    6,364
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    It was stupid of him to go on Iraqi TV, certainly. But most TV "journalists" are self-loving egomaniacs, who would jump at any chance to be on the tube even more. I don't think he would have been the only one to give an interview.

    As for his comments, from what I have read (I do not watch TV much at all with this crap going on) it can hardly be said that he was on Iraq's side. He seemed to be giving his less-that-optimistic personal opinions about what is going on. That is a far cry from going on TV and saying "I hope Saddam wins."

    He got fired for what he did; that is just fine with me. I think if this issue doesn't go away, it will give him even more publicity, which is what he wanted in the first place. This garbage just isn't worth the time.
     
  9. drisley

    drisley PCMech Founder

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 1999
    Messages:
    1,994
    Location:
    Tampa, FL
    Not only was it stupid to go on Iraqi TV, but what he said was idiotic.

    - He said our war plan failed. Hehehe....yeah, right.
    - Iraqi opposition was suprising the heck out of us - yeah, what a great thing to say on Iraqi TV, which is a regime propoganda machine.
    - That the Iraqi action is helping the opposition here in the US which is changing the way the gov't does things - gimme a break.

    In short, he went on there and basically said what they wanted him to say. So, why would he go onto their airwaves at a time of war AND deliver the enemy line while doing it?

    That was just stupid, and it ranks right up there with ego-maniac Geraldo getting kicked out of Iraq for divulging war planning on TV (another bright move :rolleyes: )
     
  10. Paul Victorey

    Paul Victorey

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 1999
    Messages:
    3,017
    Location:
    MN or WI
    Anyone have a full transcript? I missed it. I find it hard to hare a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who has covered wars since Vietnam, although this would not be his first unpopular broadcast. Didn't see it, never watch televised war coverage for reasons I've mentioned before, so I have no opinion yet.
     
  11. TimPoet

    TimPoet digitally confused

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2001
    Messages:
    2,432
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Paul, Dave had it down basically the same way I heard it coming straight from the traitor's mouth. We all know we can trust Dris, right?
    Btw, Paul, I got a question that has been driving me crazy for over a year now. What is that avatar you have? Is it an angry cabbage head caricature? A sunflower enfant terrible?
     
  12. doctorgonzo

    doctorgonzo Professional gadfly

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2002
    Messages:
    6,364
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    This is the jist of what he said, as far as I have read:

    Now, what he said about the war plan failing is stupid. But I think that it is a bit more accurate to say that the first political war plan isn't going as some hoped. It is clear that some of the comments made by the administration, such as Cheney saying it will be a matter of weeks, or Bush saying he just needs 30 days in his request for $74 billion to pay for the war, are not accurate. I don't know how many people believed what they said about this being a cakewalk (I certainly didn't), but the administration is getting heat for it now.

    What he said about how the U.S. misjudged the fighting prowess of the Iraqis is accurate. The military is admitting that the Iraqis that we are facing in the field are not the Iraqis "we war gamed against." Many people are suprised that we haven't been able to take Basra in the Shi'ite south. So I don't think you can get all angry at him for saying what the military is admitting as well. It is the fact that he said it to Iraqi TV that makes is idiotic.

    As for the fact that reports will help the anti-war movement, sure it will. That is what has happened in the past. If we see pictures of more U.S. casualties, and we don't hear news of any major advances, people are going to start asking more questions. It's pretty self-evident to me.

    Like I said before, I don't think Arnett is the only TV reporter who would have done this. Their heads are big enough already, and when they are asked for their "personal opinion" the air around their heads gets even thinner. That's why I don't listen to them. I wouldn't call him a traitor, just a publicity wh*re.
     
  13. drisley

    drisley PCMech Founder

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 1999
    Messages:
    1,994
    Location:
    Tampa, FL
    I've been following this off and on, and it seems the military brass did misjudge the opposition, but not in the way that its implied. Its implied that the opposition is really stubborn and strong and is reeking hell on us. That doesn't seem to hold water. The Iraqis are resorting to terrorist tactics and generally breaking the rules of war, and in that regard, they are different than what's expected. But, I'm getting every impression that our Marines are in no way overwhelmed by the opposition, its just coming in a different form than they thought it would.

    And, yes, the reports can help the anti-war movement, but the fact that he said that on propoganda-central in Iraq, that's the problem.

    BTW, just to point out, this could still be a matter of weeks. We can speculate, of course, but the fact is we've only been though 12 days, and its still possible to get it done within the 30 days.
     
  14. Mac Medic

    Mac Medic

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2002
    Messages:
    1,729
    I'm sorry but I disagree on this one. I'm a big proponent of getting rid of this regime, and the protestors annoy me aswell, but everyone has a right to an opinion. Sure, what he said was stupid, but it's the exact same thing being said on American TV and there are no calls for heads here. The NY Times, 2 days after the conflict started said the same thing Arnet said.
     
  15. Paul Victorey

    Paul Victorey

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 1999
    Messages:
    3,017
    Location:
    MN or WI
    I've seen quotes, I'd rather see the entire speech in context before I make any judgements.

    And my avatar is Bob the Angry Flower, www.angryflower.com, a favorite comic of mine (the recent ones aren't as good, but he had a lot of years of fantastic strips).
     
  16. doctorgonzo

    doctorgonzo Professional gadfly

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2002
    Messages:
    6,364
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    Well, if we "didn't expect" that Iraq would resort to guerilla warfare and "break the rules of war," then I have to seriously wonder how much thought went into this. As a friend of mine put it, the rules of war were made by the strong. The weak have always broken the rules in any game, because that's all they can do. I don't remember the Viet Cong playing by the rules.

    Iraq also isn't using "terrorist tactics," at least not against the U.S. Terrorist tactics are aimed at civilians, of which we don't have many in Iraq. What Iraq is doing is guerilla warfare, which has been called such for many, many years. I think it is interesting that the administration is calling guerilla warfare "terrorism" now, but frankly it isn't surprising to me.

    Sure, it could be done within the 30 days. However, something extraordinary would have to happen. It's not out of the question, I guess.
     
  17. mairving

    mairving

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 1999
    Messages:
    5,538
    Location:
    Arlington, TN
    Here is a transcript of the interview.
     
  18. drisley

    drisley PCMech Founder

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 1999
    Messages:
    1,994
    Location:
    Tampa, FL
    oem_guy, again, its not what he said that's as disturbing as where he said it. There's a difference between saying something like that in the NY Times and saying it on Iraqi TV when the bombs are dropping.

    Gonzo, the Iraqi regime has been targeting civilians during the course of this, so I do call it terrorism. Their tactics go beyond guerilla warfare. Sure, the weak cannot be expected to follow thew rules of war, but come on - shooting civilians as they flee, forcing little kids to pick up a gun and shoot at US soldiers under threat of killing their families, using human shields - gimme a break, man. That kind of goes beyong guerilla warfare.
     
  19. Paul Victorey

    Paul Victorey

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 1999
    Messages:
    3,017
    Location:
    MN or WI
    Don't see anything really wrong with what he said. He has always covered the civilian casualties of war, that was his expertise, and if he seems upset at the US government's conduct, remember what the government had done to him. He was labelled a "traitor" for reporting on civilian casualties. He was fired from CNN, after pressure from the Pentagon, because he did a story about the US's use of Sarin gas in Laos to kill US soldiers who fled the Vietnam war. CNN was put under pressure by the military to disavow that report, and they did; they fired all the journalists who refused to issue a retraction. The Pentagon threatened to effectively blacklist CNN from getting any military stories unless they fired Arnell, so they did.

    Realitically, he's not saying anything that other people haven't been saying all this time already.
     
  20. doctorgonzo

    doctorgonzo Professional gadfly

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2002
    Messages:
    6,364
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    I said, "Iraq also isn't using 'terrorist tactics,' at least not against the U.S." I wasn't talking about what Iraq is doing to civilians. That is terrorism, yes, but I was referring to guerilla tactics aimed at our military forces.
     

Share This Page