What is wrong with laughing before announcing war?
Maybe if he was laughing *about* the war that would be a problem.
why provide ammunition to critics that doubt the sincerity or humanitarian concern of a leader many have seen as rushing to war... grinning about it is only going to rile the protesters and convey mean-spiritedness to those who look for a more "presidential" sense of the gravitas of the suffering caused by war
easily preventable by a little more thinking, media savvy, or lessons learned from the last time GWB was caught making indiscreet remarks to an open mike
at what point in your journalism program do they tell you the mike is always on? if you assume it is, you won't get caught like that. basic.
more damage control required rather than avoided in the first place
Wow. Apparently the President is required to be as unemotional and bland as possible (even though he is already). He was probably joking around before hand to lighten the very serious mood that he's probably been feeling. He was serious and reserved in his speech because he is EXPECTED to be.
I'm sure he and many other presidents have wanted to give a speech like that and say, "Listen folks. This is how it is: We're going to war. Earlier, I authorized air strikes to try to take Saddam out before this whole war even had to start. Now, I'm gonna do EVERYTHING I can as president to make sure our troops come home as soon as possible. I know you're worried. So am I, but you elected me to do the right thing. I, and my advisors, think this IS the right thing. We'll take care of the troops as much as we know how."
And who knows what they were joking about. It most certainly wasn't, "Gosh, it's soooo funny that we're putting our troops in jeopardy!" Come on!
" But the appearance of impropriety is really the issue."
If he was laughing during the announcement, maybe that would be the issue. Instead the issue is that the BBC and other news orginizations have repeatedly done that since Bush came into power--and now they are no longer trusted to be in charge of the feed.
so far a lot of the warfare has been psychological
just surprised the bar isn't set higher... propaganda spin is particularly important in delicate moments.
either this message didn't get through to somebody in the mixing truck (who's now unemployed), somebody in the Communications staff (leave the mixer and mike on the flag or whatever until you cut in the live feed), or Dubya needs a few more lessons on the media's cheeky tendency to document (and the tip off that if there's a big frickin camera and lights in your face, maybe you should be extra careful of appearances)
Gawd who fecking cares if he was smiling. He's not on the Front Lines.
Guys don't make a Mountain out of a Mole Hill. Soldier abroad are laughing and carrying on but when they have to do their job the become very serious. War isn't about brooding all the time.
Hell in Riyadh my unit would do everything possible to keep peoples minds off the War at times. We'd watch movies and even play volleyball. Good God if you're going to spend your last days on Earth tis better to spend them smiling that worrying.
Who really cares what the Liberal Press says or thinks. They aren't going to support GW at any cost.
People on the other side of the world are risking their lives so that you have the right to mock the president
Excuse me?!! Risking their lives, for my causes?! Maybe that is what they think but THEY ARE SADLY BRAINWASHED. That is trifle and GARBAGE! How dare YOU! Blasting me about your bloody foriegn policy maker's insane vision to carry out the American will at whatever cost and then TELL ME that they are doing it for me?!
This is absolutely offensive and you will be held to that comment finboy.
My rights are to speak out against your texan puppet and the disgusting disease known as what is currently called "US Foreign Policy".
I see the pro-stifle club is out in full force.
SDW, again useless. If you are going to insult me you might try coming up with something more than "No, thats what you are", fool.
Setting up the divide is certainly a theme in this forum. Use some greater range of rebuttle or get lost.
For now I'll simply use a single quote that I have used in one way or another, to both defend myself and identify this "common thread" that is infesting the forum:
"anyone who would disagree would hopefully have better rebuttle than that I am leftist or that no one cares!!"
Maybe that is what they think but THEY ARE SADLY BRAINWASHED. That is trifle and GARBAGE! How dare YOU! Blasting me about your bloody foriegn policy maker's insane vision to carry out the American will at whatever cost and then TELL ME that they are doing it for me?!
Actually, it is being done for you, in a manner of speaking. Even though you don't live here, who do you think protects you? Who protects Europe? Or, are you one of the people that believes we no longer need an army, that war is obsolete, and that there will never again be military threats? The United States bears the financial costs (and cost of life) while Europe AND Canada spend billions on socialist programs. Nice arrangement.
Your completely inflexible worldview is also apparent. If this was about imposing American will, we would never have even bothered with the UN at all...we would have just done it. We now have 45 nations supporting the effort. It's not unilateral, and it isn't for oil and power. It is about getting rid of the madman and the good that comes with that accomplishment. If all we cared about was oil, we'd just buy it from them.
You may view yourself as some sort of independent, cyncial-of-all thinker. In reality, your opinions are scoffed at because of their extremity. Whether you like it or not, people call you a leftist because you ARE one. Your tired, anti-Bush administration rhetoric is just that....TIRED. It is YOU who can provide no justification for your views.
EDIT: You are right about one thing...members of our military are somewhat brainwashed. And thank GOD for it. Thank God we have people willing to do what they do.
No, not quite. There are a couple who support it enough (Britain, Australia) to provide military assistance. There are some who are providing more limited (not military) assistance, and others who have come out in "verbal" (but not material) support.
It is not so much those nations who are in support, but the governments of those nations. The people of virtually all of those nations are universally against this war, as they are worldwide, consistently polling 70% against and higher...in Turkey's case 90%.
Do the opinions of the people of these nations count for nothing at national government levels? Is democracy dead and buried? Here in the USA, we have the situation where publicly funded military might is used as private security force to protect the bottom lines and investments of big business close to this Administration.
And what's it all for? Democracy in Iraq, hahaha... ask me another one please. Eisenhower must be turning in his grave.
Here in the USA, we have the situation where publicly funded military might is used as private security force to protect the bottom lines and investments of big business close to this Administration.
And what's it all for? Democracy in Iraq, hahaha... ask me another one please. Eisenhower must be turning in his grave.
Shouldn't we wait and see what happens? Of course, France is out to make the USA the Bad Guys by blocking UN peacekeeping, humanitarian aid and help with forming a representative government, so while there are those conspiracies that make the US an autocratic tyrant, there are those who conspire to make it look like that anyway.
who do you think protects you? Who protects Europe?
We didn't ask for it and secondly, the US is simply not protecting me from Iraq. Iraq has no intrerests in Canada.
Quote:
Europe AND Canada spend billions on socialist programs.
Again, thats the US affairs if they want to spend nothing on their people. A few billion in bombs dropped already, remember I do not beleive armed conflict was necessary and I give my reasons everyday. I also do not beleive all of a sudden the world would march into Canada...thats stupid, the reason why they wouldn't is because we spend a lot on freedom and people! Socialist programs by the way isn't really correct.
I'm inflexible?! You simply thnk that since the US is there and does protect themselves that they likely protect everyone else too, and "thank goodness for it"! Well i odn't beleive that and good thing too, or else we 'd all be American. Blah, I'd have to eat your crumby Thomspons bagels and drink your crumby Dunkin Doughnuts coffee.
The US being a superpower and always being in some sort of angry conflict does not open upthe heavens for Gods word to rain down and determine that we need you.
Quote:
it isn't for oil and power
Gotcha. I'm watching the profiters of this war, I guess wil find out won't we.
Quote:
If all we cared about was oil, we'd just buy it from them.
The problem is the supply is not run by stable communities...so thus you may oh, I don't know....have some motive to stabilise it...?
Quote:
You may view yourself as some sort of independent, cyncial-of-all thinker
I'm not independent, I think Canadian and at least 15 000 000 people are with me. Its not just the US that is united, Canada is united too its just that we don't blare on about it. Of course, we're also multi-cultural so that impacts unity but not in the way I think anti-deversity types would like to beleive (not necessarily yourself)
Quote:
It is YOU who can provide no justification for your views.
I don't understand. What more can I say. I spend hours in front of this stupid terminal, trying to tell you why I beleive what I beleive and then you say stuff like this.
Give a topic, I'll give my reasoning, guranteed, but maybe save me the trouble and go back and read my other posts.
Comments
Originally posted by groverat
What is wrong with laughing before announcing war?
Maybe if he was laughing *about* the war that would be a problem.
why provide ammunition to critics that doubt the sincerity or humanitarian concern of a leader many have seen as rushing to war... grinning about it is only going to rile the protesters and convey mean-spiritedness to those who look for a more "presidential" sense of the gravitas of the suffering caused by war
easily preventable by a little more thinking, media savvy, or lessons learned from the last time GWB was caught making indiscreet remarks to an open mike
at what point in your journalism program do they tell you the mike is always on? if you assume it is, you won't get caught like that. basic.
more damage control required rather than avoided in the first place
I'm sure he and many other presidents have wanted to give a speech like that and say, "Listen folks. This is how it is: We're going to war. Earlier, I authorized air strikes to try to take Saddam out before this whole war even had to start. Now, I'm gonna do EVERYTHING I can as president to make sure our troops come home as soon as possible. I know you're worried. So am I, but you elected me to do the right thing. I, and my advisors, think this IS the right thing. We'll take care of the troops as much as we know how."
And who knows what they were joking about. It most certainly wasn't, "Gosh, it's soooo funny that we're putting our troops in jeopardy!" Come on!
If he was laughing during the announcement, maybe that would be the issue. Instead the issue is that the BBC and other news orginizations have repeatedly done that since Bush came into power--and now they are no longer trusted to be in charge of the feed.
just surprised the bar isn't set higher... propaganda spin is particularly important in delicate moments.
either this message didn't get through to somebody in the mixing truck (who's now unemployed), somebody in the Communications staff (leave the mixer and mike on the flag or whatever until you cut in the live feed), or Dubya needs a few more lessons on the media's cheeky tendency to document (and the tip off that if there's a big frickin camera and lights in your face, maybe you should be extra careful of appearances)
an ounce of prevention, right?
Originally posted by CosmoNut
Wow. Apparently the President is required to be as unemotional and bland as possible (even though he is already). ...
Remember these criticisms are coming from people who voted for Gore and Nader.
Guys don't make a Mountain out of a Mole Hill. Soldier abroad are laughing and carrying on but when they have to do their job the become very serious. War isn't about brooding all the time.
Hell in Riyadh my unit would do everything possible to keep peoples minds off the War at times. We'd watch movies and even play volleyball. Good God if you're going to spend your last days on Earth tis better to spend them smiling that worrying.
Who really cares what the Liberal Press says or thinks. They aren't going to support GW at any cost.
Originally posted by Scott
Remember these criticisms are coming from people who voted for Gore and Nader.
People on the other side of the world are risking their lives so that you have the right to mock the president
8) Exactly.
Let's kick us some eye-rackee ass.
People on the other side of the world are risking their lives so that you have the right to mock the president
Excuse me?!! Risking their lives, for my causes?! Maybe that is what they think but THEY ARE SADLY BRAINWASHED. That is trifle and GARBAGE! How dare YOU! Blasting me about your bloody foriegn policy maker's insane vision to carry out the American will at whatever cost and then TELL ME that they are doing it for me?!
This is absolutely offensive and you will be held to that comment finboy.
My rights are to speak out against your texan puppet and the disgusting disease known as what is currently called "US Foreign Policy".
I see the pro-stifle club is out in full force.
SDW, again useless. If you are going to insult me you might try coming up with something more than "No, thats what you are", fool.
Setting up the divide is certainly a theme in this forum. Use some greater range of rebuttle or get lost.
For now I'll simply use a single quote that I have used in one way or another, to both defend myself and identify this "common thread" that is infesting the forum:
"anyone who would disagree would hopefully have better rebuttle than that I am leftist or that no one cares!!"
People on the other side of the world are risking their lives so that you have the right to mock the president
Then:
I see the pro-stifle club is out in full force.
Does.
Not.
Compute.
Originally posted by stunned
maybe if Bush had cried, the public will support him more.
Maybe if he actually gave a shit he would have cried.
Maybe that is what they think but THEY ARE SADLY BRAINWASHED. That is trifle and GARBAGE! How dare YOU! Blasting me about your bloody foriegn policy maker's insane vision to carry out the American will at whatever cost and then TELL ME that they are doing it for me?!
Actually, it is being done for you, in a manner of speaking. Even though you don't live here, who do you think protects you? Who protects Europe? Or, are you one of the people that believes we no longer need an army, that war is obsolete, and that there will never again be military threats? The United States bears the financial costs (and cost of life) while Europe AND Canada spend billions on socialist programs. Nice arrangement.
Your completely inflexible worldview is also apparent. If this was about imposing American will, we would never have even bothered with the UN at all...we would have just done it. We now have 45 nations supporting the effort. It's not unilateral, and it isn't for oil and power. It is about getting rid of the madman and the good that comes with that accomplishment. If all we cared about was oil, we'd just buy it from them.
You may view yourself as some sort of independent, cyncial-of-all thinker. In reality, your opinions are scoffed at because of their extremity. Whether you like it or not, people call you a leftist because you ARE one. Your tired, anti-Bush administration rhetoric is just that....TIRED. It is YOU who can provide no justification for your views.
EDIT: You are right about one thing...members of our military are somewhat brainwashed. And thank GOD for it. Thank God we have people willing to do what they do.
We now have 45 nations supporting the effort.
No, not quite. There are a couple who support it enough (Britain, Australia) to provide military assistance. There are some who are providing more limited (not military) assistance, and others who have come out in "verbal" (but not material) support.
It is not so much those nations who are in support, but the governments of those nations. The people of virtually all of those nations are universally against this war, as they are worldwide, consistently polling 70% against and higher...in Turkey's case 90%.
Do the opinions of the people of these nations count for nothing at national government levels? Is democracy dead and buried? Here in the USA, we have the situation where publicly funded military might is used as private security force to protect the bottom lines and investments of big business close to this Administration.
And what's it all for? Democracy in Iraq, hahaha... ask me another one please. Eisenhower must be turning in his grave.
Originally posted by sammi jo
Here in the USA, we have the situation where publicly funded military might is used as private security force to protect the bottom lines and investments of big business close to this Administration.
And what's it all for? Democracy in Iraq, hahaha... ask me another one please. Eisenhower must be turning in his grave.
Shouldn't we wait and see what happens? Of course, France is out to make the USA the Bad Guys by blocking UN peacekeeping, humanitarian aid and help with forming a representative government, so while there are those conspiracies that make the US an autocratic tyrant, there are those who conspire to make it look like that anyway.
who do you think protects you? Who protects Europe?
We didn't ask for it and secondly, the US is simply not protecting me from Iraq. Iraq has no intrerests in Canada.
Europe AND Canada spend billions on socialist programs.
Again, thats the US affairs if they want to spend nothing on their people. A few billion in bombs dropped already, remember I do not beleive armed conflict was necessary and I give my reasons everyday. I also do not beleive all of a sudden the world would march into Canada...thats stupid, the reason why they wouldn't is because we spend a lot on freedom and people! Socialist programs by the way isn't really correct.
I'm inflexible?! You simply thnk that since the US is there and does protect themselves that they likely protect everyone else too, and "thank goodness for it"! Well i odn't beleive that and good thing too, or else we 'd all be American. Blah, I'd have to eat your crumby Thomspons bagels and drink your crumby Dunkin Doughnuts coffee.
The US being a superpower and always being in some sort of angry conflict does not open upthe heavens for Gods word to rain down and determine that we need you.
it isn't for oil and power
Gotcha. I'm watching the profiters of this war, I guess wil find out won't we.
If all we cared about was oil, we'd just buy it from them.
The problem is the supply is not run by stable communities...so thus you may oh, I don't know....have some motive to stabilise it...?
You may view yourself as some sort of independent, cyncial-of-all thinker
I'm not independent, I think Canadian and at least 15 000 000 people are with me. Its not just the US that is united, Canada is united too its just that we don't blare on about it. Of course, we're also multi-cultural so that impacts unity but not in the way I think anti-deversity types would like to beleive (not necessarily yourself)
It is YOU who can provide no justification for your views.
I don't understand. What more can I say. I spend hours in front of this stupid terminal, trying to tell you why I beleive what I beleive and then you say stuff like this.
Give a topic, I'll give my reasoning, guranteed, but maybe save me the trouble and go back and read my other posts.
Originally posted by SDW2001
Who protects Europe?
Who protects Europe from ... ?
Russia? China? Erm ... the massed millions of Iraqi soldiers poised to invade Turkey? Argentina? Morocco?
What are you talking about?
Originally posted by Harald
Who protects Europe from ... ?
Russia? China? Erm ... the massed millions of Iraqi soldiers poised to invade Turkey? Argentina? Morocco?
What are you talking about?
Perhaps someone, forget to tell him that the cold war is over, and that many of the eastern countries have enter in NATO.