Sliming the Troops

[big bad john]

It seems as if Canada is not the only country that troops feel slagged in.


Sliming the troops


By Michelle Malkin


A most common complaint I hear from our troops is that the media rarely report on the military's good deeds.
    One simple column I wrote last month lauding the humanitarian efforts of our men and women in the USS Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group, for example, resulted in an avalanche of mail from military members and their families expressing astonishment and relief over a bit of positive press.
    "I cannot tell you how much that it meant to myself as well as several of my shipmates to be praised," wrote Mariano Gonzales, a member of Strike Fighter Squadron 151 aboard the Lincoln. "Sometimes it seems that in today's world, it is just not fashionable for someone in a position to influence public opinion to admit that the U.S. military's role in the world involves more than just war and bloodshed." 
    Well, with folks like powerful CNN executive Eason Jordan in charge " a man who clearly has issues with the U.S. military " it's no wonder our troops so often feel smeared and slimed.
    For the past week, Internet Web logs ("blogs") round the world have buzzed about outrageous comments on U.S. soldiers reportedly made by Mr. Jordan, head of CNN's news division, at a World Economic Forum gathering in Davos, Switzerland. (My reporting on the controversy, with extensive links to other bloggers, is at www.michellemalkin.com.)
    Several eyewitnesses say Mr. Jordan asserted Jan. 27 that U.S. military personnel deliberately targeted and killed reporters in Iraq. (Mr. Jordan has since disputed the characterization of his remarks.) Why wasn't this headline news?
    Forum organizers have stone-walled citizen attempts to gain access to a videotape or transcript of the Davos meeting. But American businessman Rony Abovitz, who attended the panel on which Mr. Jordan participated, reported immediately after the forum that "Jordan asserted that he knew of 12 journalists who had not only been killed by U.S. troops in Iraq, but they had in fact been targeted. He repeated the assertion a few times, which seemed to win favor in parts of the audience [the anti-U.S. crowd] and cause great strain on others."
    Another panel attendee, historian Justin Vaisse, wrote on his blog that Mr. Jordan "didn't mince words in declaring that the intentions of journalists in Iraq were never perceived as neutral and were made deliberate targets by 'both sides.' "
    On Monday, journalist and presidential adviser David Gergen, who moderated the panel, told me Mr. Jordan indeed claimed news personnel in Iraq had been targeted by military "on both sides." Mr. Gergen said Mr. Jordan tried to backtrack, but then speculated about a few killings of journalists in the Middle East " a discussion Mr. Gergen cut off because "the military and the government weren't there to defend themselves."
    Panel member Rep. Barney Frank, Massachusetts Democrat, also told me Mr. Jordan asserted journalists were deliberately targeted by the U.S. military and "left open the question" of individual cases in which U.S. troops targeted reporters.
    Panel attendee Sen. Christopher Dodd, Connecticut Democrat, issued a statement in response to my inquiry, saying he "was outraged by the comments. Mr. Dodd is tremendously proud of the sacrifice and service of our American military personnel."
    Mr. Jordan's defenders say he was "misunderstood" and deserves the "benefit of the doubt." But the man's record is one of incurable anti-American pandering.
    Mr. Jordan admitted last spring that CNN withheld news out of Baghdad to maintain access to Saddam Hussein's regime. He was quoted last fall telling a Portuguese forum he believed reporters had been arrested and tortured by U.S. forces (a charge he maintains today). In autumn 2002, he reportedly accused the Israeli military of deliberately targeting CNN personnel "on numerous occasions."
    Mr. Jordan was in the middle of the infamous Tailwind scandal, in which CNN was forced to retract a Peter Arnett report that the American military used sarin gas against its own troops in Laos. In 1999, Mr. Jordan declared: "We are a global network, and we take global interest first, not U.S. interests first."
    Now, who is more deserving of the benefit of the doubt? Eason Jordan or our men and women on the battlefield?
    I support the troops.
     
     Michelle Malkin is a nationally syndicated columnist and is a contributor to Fox News Channel, a competitor of CNN

 

[pbi]

I'm reminded of the time I spent at Quantico (97-98). Sometimes in class the US guys would whine about "the public doesn't understand us" or "we have no public support" or (LOL!!) "we have no money".

After I stopped laughing I told them they could come back with me to Canada and see a country where  those complaints REALLY mean something!! They wouldn't know what to do if they faced the struggle that we have just to continue to exist as a military force.

We all judge using our own yardsticks.

Cheers

 

[sigpig]

Although Jordans comments and actions are inexcusable I find journalists of his mindset to be in the minority in the US. The vast majority of coverage in the US is sugar coated, jingoistic  pablum. Everyone is a "Hero" and "defender of freedom." It almost feels that most journalists are terrified of being labelled traitors if they conduct and kind of critical or questioning coverage of the military.

As pbi stated, compared to Canada, no US service man/woman should be complaining about the military's coverage in the media.

 

[tomahawk6]

I disagree. The main stream media was against the war in Iraq [political reasons] and their coverage was slanted accordingly. If it bleeds it leads is their policy about what stories are covered. As a result people thought all of Iraq was in chaos instead of only 4 provinces. There were no stories about the good work of our engineers and civil affairs teams. This was obvious in the election coverage. In fact on election day the democrats actually thought they would win based on exit polls. After the voters actually voted did the democrats discover they were badly beaten. Then there was the finger pointing. What actually happened was that the media tried to discourage people from voting. The news media in the US is viewed with serious disdain by the majority of americans both in and out of uniform.

 

[sigpig]

I'm not talking about coverage of "The War." I'm talking about coverage of military personnel and events in general. Even in the 'if it bleeds it leads' stories the criticism isn't directed to the troops/units - regardless of their conduct, but on the higher level policies of whether they should be there or not.  That can't be construed as negative coverage of the military.

The news media tried to discourage voting? How? What media was that? Not any I observed around here.

I guess it must be because I'm not an American that I don't view the news media here in serious disdain. Wait, there is "Fox News" - official propaganda outfit for the Bush administration.

 

[Wizard of OZ]

1) How many Canadian flags fly over homes in your area?

2) How many yellow ribbons are on cars in your city/town/village?

3) How many young Canadians say i wanna be a solider growing up?

4) How much political support have you seen for the CF in the past 15 yrs?

Now go to the states and ask these same questions.

1), just about every house

2),prob close to 1 in 3 cars

3), Better then none say they wanna be a Marine or some form of armed forces in the states. (cause i can't think of single kid on my block in Canada ever saying it.)

Hmm you bet they get the support they need most of the time.  People realize that they have political masters over there unlike here were the CF solider gets blamed for it all

but i rant no more.

 

[pbi]

1) How many Canadian flags fly over homes in your area?
Lots more than ten or 15 years ago. I compare this to living in the States and we do not do too badly.

2) How many yellow ribbons are on cars in your city/town/village?
Edmonton and Winnipeg both have both had yellow ribbons in the past and have put on city receptions for returning troops
. Here in Afghanistan there are plenty of signs, posters, cards, etc sent to us by Canadian schools, legions, police departments, communities and ordinary citizens. The spirit is the same.

3) How many young Canadians say i wanna be a solider growing up?

How many young Americans do? Why is the US Army facing the recruiting problems it has been for the last few years?

4) How much political support have you seen for the CF in the past 15 yrs?
Way, way more today than 15 years ago, and certainly much more than ten years ago when Somalia was hot.
Now go to the states and ask these same questions.

1), just about every house

Wrong, wrong-at least when I lived there. I lived in Virginia (just outside DC) for a year and I had almost the only US flag in my neighborhood (I flew a US and a Canadian flag on my house). In fact, my wife and I often remarked that the Canadian stereotype that Americans were insane flag-wavers just didn't seem to be true.

2),prob close to 1 in 3 cars
Really? Where do you see this? I'm over the border in North Dakota and Minnesota from time to time, and I also see quite a few US cars up in Winnipeg (cheap booze...) and I wouldn't say that it's anything like that.


3), Better then none say they wanna be a Marine or some form of armed forces in the states. (cause i can't think of single kid on my block in Canada ever saying it.)

What do you mean "better than none"? I don't understand that phrase.

Hmm you bet they get the support they need most of the time.   People realize that they have political masters over there unlike here were the CF solider gets blamed for it all

What are you talking about "gets blamed for it all"? Blamed for what? By whom? And, as I mentioned, alot of people in the US military are not all 100% certain that they have the support that they need: look at tomahawk6's comments about the "mainstream media".

but i rant no more.

Good, because IMHO you are indulging in stereotypical thinking. The US is way, way more engaged in the GWOT than we are, and the war is affecting far more Americans than it does here, especially with the huge call up of ARNG and Res into active duty. Of course there will be a bigger reaction and a stronger display of patriotism. But, what about the outpouring of emotion in this country when the PPCLI soldiers died at Kandahar? What about the reaction of Canadians to the tomb of the unknown soldier? What about the increasing attendance of Canadians at Nov 11 events? IMHO you are selling your own country short. Comparisons between the US and Canada are almost always inaccurate and usually pointless, producing only frustration and bad feeling. We are not them: they are not us. People from either nation who do not like their own homelands are free to cross the border and live there: thousands go in both directions every year. Cheers.

 

[Bic519]

After reading   Wizard of Oz's four questions this afternoon, I sent a copy to some of   my American friends and acquaintances. The responses I've received so far,  are inline with PBI's observances of American behaviour.

While flag use increases around patriotic holidays such as the 4th of July and immediately after 9/11, the general consensus so far seems to be about 1 or 2 flags per neighbourhood. In Canada, flag use  increases around July 1, and there are those that fly the flag year round (including apartment dwellers who display the flag in their windows).

Yellow ribbons are common in the US, but 1 in 3 was considered to be a very   high estimate. 1 in 20, 1 in 25 seemed to be more inline with their observations. It was also noted that Pink ribbons for breast cancer and rainbow ribbons are displayed on cars along with anti war bumper stickers. I gather Americans are more likely to use bumper stickers, ribbons etc. on their cars than we are, I don't notice a lot of ribbons or bumper stickers of any kind on my daily commute. Close to 1500 American soldiers have died in Iraq alone, adjusted for population, that would be the equivalent of 150 Canadian soldiers. Were we to take those kind of casualties there would be more yellow ribbons here as well.

As for young Americans wanting to be soldiers, it doesn't appear to be as common as you've stated. Of the three who have responded so far, one didn't know of anyone who wanted to be a soldier when they grew up; one didn't know of anyone who wanted to be a soldier when they grew up, but had a family member who decided as an adult to join; the third knew a boy who had wanted to be one, but changed his mind. These are people in their late thirties, early forties, who are old enough to have observed more than just their own generation.

As for political support over the last 15 years, I believe that American military spending was decreasing prior to 9/11 I'm not sure if it still is. A friend mentioned some bases having closed since the first Gulf war and defense industries downsized.

Could you elaborate on your statement about blame and political masters?

Regarding your comment on American soldiers getting the support they need most of the time, perhaps, but I have read about problems with trucks in Iraq not having the proper armour and cuts to Military benefits so I don't think its quite the Utopia you suggest. Despite this, despite the stop loss programme, despite the fact that many American soldiers are into their second year long deployment in Iraq after a year off and despite the relatively high casualties, they do not, in my observation, complain anywhere near as much as you do. (Note, the Canadian vs. American comparison works both ways)

The truth is, Canada is what we make it. If you don't like the number of flags flying, put one up. If you want to see more yellow ribbons, hand some out. If you don't like the political support the CF gets, quit when your contract is up, join a party, file your papers and stand for election. You'd be surprised at the number of American soldiers who do, just check the number of members of Congress and the Senate with military experience.

If you don't like the amount of support and recognition the CF gets, trying giving it instead. Its a two way street. Tell a teacher how incredibly important her work is, drop a box of art supplies off at a local school (you'd be surprised at how much of the cost of supplies comes out of a teacher's own pocket) The next time you see a farmer in his field, pull over to the side of the road and tell him how much you appreciate the work he and his family do to produce food for you. Compliment a referee involved in children's sports; its a thankless job, they don't get paid much if anything and they could tell you thing or two about verbal abuse. Take flowers to the nurses at a pediatric ward, they may not be deployed for 6 months at a time, but their work is hard and can be heartbreaking in the extreme. I'd be very surprised if they did not return the favour.

Try considering your fellow Canadians as the people who make this the wonderful country that it is, rather than deadbeats who don't pay as much attention to you as you think we should and instead of comparing a vilified version of us to your fictionalized fantasy of what America is.

 

[pbi]

Bicque: you are probably going to take a few hits from folks around here, but I for one think that is a good post. I wish Canadians would stop this endless penis-measuring with the US, and start growing up as a country. These drivelling debates about "who's better" are as I have already stated, pointless. We need to focus on sorting out our own issues, and stop looking across the border, either in envy or in derision.

Cheers.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Bicque: you are probably going to take a few hits from folks around here

Well, he shouldn't, it was indeed a great post.  I feel underappreciated at my civvie job on occasion.  When I do, I tell the housekeeping staff that they're doing a good job or pass a compliment on to those that are lower down the food chain than I am.  Does wonders for everyone's morale.

 

[Wizard of OZ]

Could you elaborate on your statement about blame and political masters?


What was meant by that was the in the States people realize the troops are just following orders and tend not to blame the troops as easily as those who lead them.

In Canada people forget who the troops work for very quickly and in some case not all but some tend to but the blame on those who are in country then those who sent them there. 

My post was not meant to be a "penis measuring against the US"  Just an example of the difference in how our countries treat the military.

Yes they have down sized thier military but they as well as all but two other NATO nations spend way more on defence then we do.  Yes they did have to scrounge for steel to uparmour some of their vehicles in Iraq but none of thier front line stuff is in the condition most of the CF's is.

PBI

It all depends on where in the states you lived.  I lived across from michigan and i would say at least every third to fourth house had a flag about its roof, or in its yard.

Yes Edmonton did have a parade when they came back from the stan and they do use yellow ribbions but support varries from provicne to province from city to city.  I think in my opinion the US is much more supportive of its men in uniform then we are.  We have not had occasion to need them nor to we as Canadians see the Military as priortiy like other nations do.  We spend our money on health care and socail programs.  All are good but a balance must be struck. 

The only time we seem to stir our patriotic paddle is when something negative happens and someone gets hurt.  It should not have to be this way.  It is our own fault some times we forget that we need to keep public opinion high and on our side.

 

[putz]

My parents live in Texas and as such I spend A few weeks every year visiting them.  I agree with PBI points 1,3,4 from oz's list.  However, I have found over the last few years (in Central Texas at least) that when it comes to yellow ribbons or the "support our troop" magnets.  They are everywhere!  Back of cars, around car antennas, trees, mailboxes etc.  The also get HUGH support from the businesses in the area.

 

[pbi]

[It is our own fault some times we forget that we need to keep public opinion high and on our side/quote]

OK-I'm with you here(although we're doing a hell of a lot better now than we were 10, 15 or 20 years ago)

Cheers

 

[FredDaHead]

I recently had the opportunity to talk with three World War Two vets (three Captains, of which two served in Europe with the Infantry) and asked them what they thought of the support and funding of today's forces, expecting they would say we need more funding, support, etc.

Surprisingly, they said that although now our forces don't have enough support, size, or money, we weren't exactly better before World War Two, and that if something big happened (ie, a major war or something like that) the Forces would undoubtably get support and, with it, funding. Honestly, I think the vets are probably right. I'm pretty sure if there had been the Internet in the 1930s, we would have found people saying the exact same things we're saying now, about our armed forces.

As for flags... Well, I'm from Quebec, so forget about seeing Canadian flags

I don't agree that no canadians want to be soldiers growing up. Besides myself (I've wanted to serve since I was about 4), I know a few people who have wanted to be soldiers as they grew up, although some of them decided against it. My cousin (who's about 25 IIRC) and who's serving right now, also wanted to join when he was younger.

So, yes, not that many want to be soldiers, probably not as many as in other places, but I don't think the proportion is negligible.

 

[Gunner]

Surprisingly, they said that although now our forces don't have enough support, size, or money, we weren't exactly better before World War Two, and that if something big happened (ie, a major war or something like that) the Forces would undoubtably get support and, with it, funding. Honestly, I think the vets are probably right. I'm pretty sure if there had been the Internet in the 1930s, we would have found people saying the exact same things we're saying now, about our armed forces.

Canada's miitary is certainly in better shape now than it was prior to WWII (and WWI for that matter).  However, it is a comparision of between two different times in our nation's history.  Canada is a member of the G7 and wants to have its voice heard on the world stage, therefore it is expected to pull its weight on the world stage.  The simple answer is, we don't, and are not taken seriously because of it.

I'm a firm believer that the military lost a valuable opportunity by not harnessing the collective experience of our WWII veterans. They should have been formed into a powerful lobby group for the miitary as they lived with the results of Canadian government neglect through the 20s and 30s.  The attitude of once something happens, the government will provide support is an example of very poor planning and narrow mindedness.

 

[big bad john]

One of the things that has surprised me in Canada is the attitude that many people have about the Military.  One of my neighbours is a mucky muck at HRDC.  I asked if they ever recommended the CF as a career option to people.  She seemed very offended at the thought of it! 

In the UK, we had a very bad unenployment problem in the '70s.  For the better, many young people were advised to try the Armed Forces.  Isn't it better to pay service persons salaries and training costs, than having many of them on the dole?  It helps them develop skills and disapline that they can use in their future.

Since I have only been here as acivilian a short while, I have only just started my career search.  I do notice that when many prospective employers hear that I have just left the Marines and as an Infantry/Commando Officer they tend to get ansy.  You know what I mean, "Dogs and Soldier keep off the grass Please."