If the NY Times were to report D-Day today:
Drew263
Birmingham, AL Posts: 602
June 6, 1944. -NORMANDY- Three hundred French civilians were killed and thousands more wounded today in the first hours of America's invasion of continental Europe. Casualties were heaviest among women and children.
Most of the French casualties were the result of artillery fire from American ships attempting to knock out German fortifications prior to the landing of hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops. Reports from a makeshift hospital in the French town of St. Mere Eglise said the carnage was far worse than the French had anticipated and reaction against the American invasion was running high. "We are dying for no reason," said a Frenchman speaking on condition of anonymity. "Americans can't even shoot straight. I never thought I'd say this, but life was better under Adolph Hitler."
The invasion also caused severe environmental damage. American troops, tanks, trucks and machinery destroyed miles of pristine shoreline and thousands of acres of ecologically sensitive wetlands. It was believed that the habitat of the spineless French crab was completely wiped out, threatening the species with extinction. A representative of Greenpeace said his organization, which had tried to stall the invasion for over a year, was appalled at the destruction, but not surprised. "This is just another example of how the military destroys the environment without a second thought, " said Christine Moanmore. "And it's all about corporate greed." Contacted at his Manhattan condo, a member of the French government-in-exile who abandoned Paris when Hitler invaded said the invasion was based solely on American financial interests. "Everyone knows the President Roosevelt has ties to big beer," said Pierre LeWimp.
"Once the German beer industry is conquered, Roosevelt's beer cronies will control the world market and make a fortune."
Administration supporters said America's aggressive actions were based in part on the assertions of controversial scientist Albert Einstein, who sent a letter to Roosevelt speculating that the Germans were developing a secret weapon, a so-called "atomic bomb." Such a weapon could produce casualties on a scale never seen before and cause environmental damage that could last for thousands of years. Hitler has denied having such a weapon and international inspectors were unable to locate such weapons even after spending two long weekends in Germany.
Shortly after the invasion began reports surfaced that German prisoners had been abused by Americans. Mistreatment of Jews by Germans at so-called "concentration camps" has been rumored but so far, remains unproven.
Several thousand Americans died during the first hours of the invasion and French officials are concerned that uncollected corpses pose a public health risk. "The Americans should have planned for this in advance," they said. "It's their mess and we don't intend to clean it up."
Most of the French casualties were the result of artillery fire from American ships attempting to knock out German fortifications prior to the landing of hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops. Reports from a makeshift hospital in the French town of St. Mere Eglise said the carnage was far worse than the French had anticipated and reaction against the American invasion was running high. "We are dying for no reason," said a Frenchman speaking on condition of anonymity. "Americans can't even shoot straight. I never thought I'd say this, but life was better under Adolph Hitler."
The invasion also caused severe environmental damage. American troops, tanks, trucks and machinery destroyed miles of pristine shoreline and thousands of acres of ecologically sensitive wetlands. It was believed that the habitat of the spineless French crab was completely wiped out, threatening the species with extinction. A representative of Greenpeace said his organization, which had tried to stall the invasion for over a year, was appalled at the destruction, but not surprised. "This is just another example of how the military destroys the environment without a second thought, " said Christine Moanmore. "And it's all about corporate greed." Contacted at his Manhattan condo, a member of the French government-in-exile who abandoned Paris when Hitler invaded said the invasion was based solely on American financial interests. "Everyone knows the President Roosevelt has ties to big beer," said Pierre LeWimp.
"Once the German beer industry is conquered, Roosevelt's beer cronies will control the world market and make a fortune."
Administration supporters said America's aggressive actions were based in part on the assertions of controversial scientist Albert Einstein, who sent a letter to Roosevelt speculating that the Germans were developing a secret weapon, a so-called "atomic bomb." Such a weapon could produce casualties on a scale never seen before and cause environmental damage that could last for thousands of years. Hitler has denied having such a weapon and international inspectors were unable to locate such weapons even after spending two long weekends in Germany.
Shortly after the invasion began reports surfaced that German prisoners had been abused by Americans. Mistreatment of Jews by Germans at so-called "concentration camps" has been rumored but so far, remains unproven.
Several thousand Americans died during the first hours of the invasion and French officials are concerned that uncollected corpses pose a public health risk. "The Americans should have planned for this in advance," they said. "It's their mess and we don't intend to clean it up."
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
1. Hitler wasn't the soverign ruler of France.
2. Hitler's power in France wasn't secured by American involvement and support for fifteen years prior to D-day.
3. Hitler isn't Saddam Hussein anymore than he's George W. Bush.
I could write an article similar to this, only casting Iraq as France, the U.S. as Germany, Britian as Italy, and the insurgents as the French underground - but I've long since realized that the axiom "Mention Hitler and you Lose the Argument" is true.
Reminder: The Iraq War Is Not World War II.
Our current day situation is far from the same senerio. We are engaged in an unpopular and extremely unnecessary war with a country who posed no threat to the world. While during WWII we where seen as one oof the saviors of Europe and Asia. Now we are seen as a destabilizing force in the Middle East. This is not a reflection on our troops but our acts back then where seen as honorable, now our actions are farthest from.
So taking this into consideration the way the war is covered will be differently because the motive behind the wars are different. The honorable cause that was WWII was covered as such. While the disgrace that is the invasion of Iraq will be protrayed as such in the media and rightfully so.
There's a HUGE difference between sovereign nations attacking/taking over the world and group of thugs performing terror attacks.
if you put both feet on the chair and rock it...its much easier.
so lammmmmmmmmmme and by the way....who exactly are you against....??? lol
http://www.upcheer.com/images/foxnews/
The only thing wrong with your statment is the mention of iraq performing terrorist attacks.
The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
nobody wrote that ww2 was not necessary ... well, not when i was discussing the topic ...
sigh ... it is what it is i guess ...
Hey RainDog, I'm sorry but Drew in no way shape or form related this article to Iraq. It is solely about the leftist, liberal views of the paper and how they come across through it's reporting...
Here's another case in point, the four guys they arrested for trying to blow up JFK airport was reported on page 34 of the the NYT this week. If that doesn't say something about the paper, I don't know what does.
Well I would have to disagree with anyone who made that statement. While there was no need for Germany or Japan to engage in aggressive acts of war it was in fact necessary to stop then from carry out their plans of conquest.
It blows my mind that there are people who actually disagree with your last statement... most of all a guy who is running for president. I can hardly believe that is actually true!
Well that may be because there are people who believe that war is not a necessary and to a certain extent they are correct, but if you have one group of people or country engaging in aggressive hostile actions towards another group or country then the right to defend oneself is a necessity. people like Kucinich fail to see that part of the equation. Either that or they live in a complete fantasy world where people like Hitler don't exist.
oh please. do you know what our mayor (mike bloomberg-R) said to us in response to the jfk plot story?
"Stop worrying. Get a life."
that made me smile. and also really like him, for at least a moment.
edit: OH SNAP! i need to pay tribute to the entire, correct quote:
"There are lots of threats to you in the world. There's the threat of a heart attack for genetic reasons. You can't sit there and worry about everything. Get a life," he said.
thanks mike!
cross the river to the eastside
i don't think kucinich said ww2 was not necessary ... nor did anyone in the thread i was in ... but feel free to continue to believe what you want ...
Well I haven't read the thread so I will take your word for it.
That's because the whole plot was retarded. The media blew this way out of proportion. I was reading the Star Ledger and in an article it mentioned that the pipeline system has a fail safe mechanism to prevent the pipes from blowing up if something where to happen the depot at either JFK Airport or Linden, NJ.
oh totally. and thank god mike isn't being like rudy who grabs onto anything, like this, to show how bad terrorism is in the world today and why we need to elect him.
i added the full quote above
cross the river to the eastside
Though I haven't read it, to me it says that the paper isn't prone to engaging in terrorist related fear mongering. The JFK airport plot was so hopelessly ridiculous that I'm surprised it made the news at all. You cannot - I repeat, cannot blow-up jet fuel in the way the plotters intended. It's as realistic as the mad dreams of a man who thinks he can soar through the clouds by taping a butterfly to his forehead.
Fucking Rudy. The guy had current Bush-like approval ratings on 9/10/01 and just because he holds a couple of fucking press conferences after the attack he is called a hero. What a douche bag.
You mean planning to blow up a fuel line that wasn't likely to do any damage to the actual airport?
And there was actually a blurb on the cover about the story on June 3rd.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
That's an awesome stretch there. Just reporting the news is
"fear-mongering". The intent of these guys is what is important, not if they were professionals or not.
Last year a guy drove an SUV through a crowded section of students at the University of North Carolina. His reasoning was that his actions were retribution for the treatment of Muslims around the world. I guess since he didn't kill or seriously hurt anybody - that isn't newsworthy either by yoru standards....
No, it's news. What it isn't is an excuse for politicians to get on soap-boxes screaming about how unsafe we are - and all the "necessary" steps we'll need to take in order to "protect" us plebeians from them swarthy hordes. If a man has to constantly remind me how much I need him, then chances are I don't.
So planning to blow something up and trying to are really all that different? Only difference is a matter of time. I'm glad you aren't in charge we'd procrastinate ourselves right into the grave.
Not really but when the media headlines read that a terrorist attacks that could have killed thousands was thwarted when in fact the attack would have failed because of the fail safe measures in place. That is just the media sensationalizing the situation to sell papers. So the NY Times was right by paying little attention to this story.
They did the same with the Ft. Dix story as well. I have been to Ft. Dix and you can't just drive in to the place. My ex brother-in-law did his reserve duty there and since 9/11 no one is allowed on base.
The news item is that 4 men were caught tyring to attempt mass murder through a terrorist stike against the US. That is front page news anyday of the week! That is all that matters. It is a mute point if it was the fucking three stooges that were plotting this attack, okay - the news is that 4 human beings were trying to kill thousands of other human beings becuase of religous-motivated hatred.
What if these guys had figured out their plan was faulty and instead tried for an easier target? What if they decided, fuck this gas shit... let's just go pull a London subway attack????
The POINT is that these are murderous-planning bastards and they were caught. That is big-time news, okay? I'm not sure how you can disagree with that....
Let's say your kids went to a school were a few of their classmates were caught trying to pull a Columbine or something... only their plan wouldn't have worked for some reason or another... Wouldn't you say that is some HUGE news that these kids were caught before they attempted anything??? Think about that, especially if they were your children's classmates.
You are confusing your issues, or at least you are trying to bring too many things into the equation. Dude, I'm not talking about the issue of politicians who use fear-mongering as a tactic. I know and AGREE with you about that.
In this case, I'm talking about journalism and the poor taste that was shown by the NYT. That's all.
if, if and more ifs...
If three idiots down my block get pictures of a federal building from google earth and try to raise money to buy explosives to bomb it, yes it's a story, but not front-page, interrupt our scheduled programming news.
Now if their house is raided and they have blocks of C4 and blueprints, then that's another story, but if you make a big deal about every nutjob who wants to blow up something, their will be no more ink left to print. Same with Fort Dix - their plan was to disguise themselves as pizza deliverymen and start shooting a bunch of trained soldiers. Somehow this is now a plan for a terrorist attack instead of just a group of nutjobs with too much time on their hands who have seen too many B movies.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln