—Yesterday on Fox News, host Bill O’Reilly tried to argue that Afghanistan has been “successful” and that “there’s no danger at all of the Taliban reclaiming that country.” At the worst, he said, the Taliban will be “annoying.” When his guest, Harvard University professor Sarah Sewall, pointed out that people on the ground disagree, O’Reilly dismissed her, stating, “I talked to everybody.”
Supreme NATO commander Gen. James Jones recently stated that Afghanistan is close to becoming a “narco state,” whose $3 billion dollars in annual drug profits are financing the Taliban. Council on Foreign Relations Afghanistan expert Dr. Barnett Rubin said that Afghanistan is at a “tipping point” and that the Afghan people believe “trends are going in the Taliban’s favor.” Gen. David Richards, a British officer who commands NATO’s 32,000 troops, warned that unless coalition forces begin stepping up reconstruction efforts, 70 percent of the country could decide to back the Taliban.—
I, for one, don’t doubt O’Reilly for a second. After all, he’s been correct about everything else. Well, except for the time he confused ‘loofah’ and ‘felafel’ when he was sexually harrassing one of the producers on his show, and the time he said he won a ‘Peabody Award’, when he really meant a ‘Polk Award’, which he didn’t actually win either.
I’m not sure anymore whether or not this is just a big joke on the masses ignorant enough to believe such things. I’ve seen so many articles about Afghanistan recently highlighting the worsening situation on the ground. The British military just stated they needed X more choppers to shuttle around troops to the fighting (since they don’t have enough to just garrison them in hotbeds). Until earlier this month almost all the US troops in Afghanistan were operating independently of NATO forces for whatever reason (our arrogance perhaps?)…
I get pretty burned out reporting all the bad news in my journal as it is.
No surprises there. O’reilly is mildly amusing, but anyone who thinks he knows what he’s talking about is not too concerned with what’s really going on. He’s been known to introduce “facts” into his debates even when they’re complete fabrications. One I know dealt with him creating a fictional “business review” magazine during a debate simply to bolster his point. I’m sure there are many others (like the Peabody claim) but there’s not much point in trying to list them, it’s best to just realize it’s trashy entertainment and just move on.
This thread is about Afghanistan, not Iraq. Why are you confusing the two?
What’s happening in Iraq is not a war. It’s an invasion. Plain and simple. the Neocons want their oil. We invaded Iraq for their oil. Period. The American public has started waking up. It’s only taken them 5 and a half years to begin to understand it,…but it is finally starting to happen.
Here’s what most Americans want. They want Bin Laden brought to justice. That hasn’t happened. WW2 took less time than the chase for Bin Laden. How much patience is required?
Of course, if Bin Laden were caught, or if he is actually dead…then the Bushies and the Neocons would have to invent a new boogieman. And they don’t want that. They’d have to begin a whole new propaganda program.
Then again, if you consider RW pundits like Bill O’Reilly to be honest, truthful and accurate, you probably won’t understand any of this anyway.
What’s happening in Iraq is not a war. It’s an invasion. Plain and simple. the Neocons want their oil. We invaded Iraq for their oil. Period.
Oh dear.
The American public has started waking up. It’s only taken them 5 and a half years to begin to understand it,…but it is finally starting to happen.
I’d prefer it if you all went back to sleep.
Of course, if Bin Laden were caught, or if he is actually dead…then the Bushies and the Neocons would have to invent a new boogieman. And they don’t want that. They’d have to begin a whole new propaganda program.
Yeah, the fact that Bin Laden is a blood thirsty mass murder is all just the product of good ol’ fashioned American propaganda.
Yeah, the fact that Bin Laden is a blood thirsty mass murder is all just the product of good ol’ fashioned American propaganda.
Seriously, go back to sleep.
You’re entitled to your opinions. However, you shouldn’t have to try and discredit me to prove your points. For example, I never said “American propaganda”. Those are your words, not mine. I’m not anti-American. In fact, I’m a US Navy Veteran.
If you have the facts, or links to the facts then post them. I’d be interested in seeing them.
I’m not sure anymore whether or not this is just a big joke on the masses ignorant enough to believe such things. I’ve seen so many articles about Afghanistan recently highlighting the worsening situation on the ground. The British military just stated they needed X more choppers to shuttle around troops to the fighting (since they don’t have enough to just garrison them in hotbeds). Until earlier this month almost all the US troops in Afghanistan were operating independently of NATO forces for whatever reason (our arrogance perhaps?)…
Because NATO never gave the thumbs up for this in the first place. Orielly is a lacky and will be the first to go when the fit hits the shan. Dude, Doesn’t understand He’s a tool in every sense of the word and tools are easily replaced.
Yeah, the fact that Bin Laden is a blood thirsty mass murder is all just the product of good ol’ fashioned American propaganda.
[:/]
What does that Make this administration then? The Middle east has already suffered far more casualties than than the towers based on bush’s little war. The american Death toll is creeping up on the tower’s death toll the Numbers Wounded is FAR beyond the towers death toll? Were un amercan because we don’t want anymore senselessly killed? yikes that’s an ugly fallacy.
Late,
grmpysmrf
However, the issue at hand here is actually that you’re concern is the level of people’s belief in B. O’Reilly or Rush L.
Like “tha cooter” said earlier… its just TV entertainment - that is all.
Well put.
And most educated well-informed folk don’t rely on pundits like O’Reilly or Limbaugh to form their opinions. But well-informed people aren’t the only ones who vote.
Like “tha cooter” said earlier… its just TV entertainment - that is all.
Yes, if you have half a brain and a wonky sense of humor, sure. But for their millions of listeners, Bill and Rush are some kind of minor deities. If it comes from their mouths, well, it MUST be true - when in fact it’s usually the opposite.
A huge percentage of Rushs’ listeners STILL think that Iraq had something to do with Al Qeada and 9/11. Hell, some of them even think we FOUND “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq…or that malarky about the Clinton’s “killing spree.” Why do you suppose that is, hm?
Freaking sheep, I swear…but their shepherds are the truly reprehensible ones. And as stated above - these people vote.
However, the issue at hand here is actually that you’re concern is the level of people’s belief in B. O’Reilly or Rush L.
Like “tha cooter” said earlier… its just TV entertainment - that is all.
Well put.
And most educated well-informed folk don’t rely on pundits like O’Reilly or Limbaugh to form their opinions. But well-informed people aren’t the only ones who vote.[/reply]
actually I was responding to the part about Bin laden being a cold blooded mass murderer. I know the subject went off course but like I a tard I followed off course to make a point
Late
grmpysmrf
