Is the US targeting journalists in Baghdad?

Why start a new thread? Expand this one.

Because in HIS thread, it sounds like the US is doing something on PURPOSE. You know the conspiracy effect. OooOOooo

Give me a break kvm.

Sure, Zim, you have no points to back up your opposition to kvm's arguments, no evidence to contradict the black and white (even if there was, it would take a think tank like RUPE to sort through all the ********) so you resort to insulting him and trying to silence him.

What arguments? All he did was post a link to a news story and ask a clearly presumptive question. That's hardly making an argument.

I also wouldn't argue with someone that claimed that grass was blue, the sky was green, and we breathed in water.

French television is running a footage shownig how the tank targeted the hotel for over two minutes before firing.

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?clic...57B262&set_id=1

Could you show us a link or proof from a country that doesn't hate the US please? Thanks.

I mean come on, it's French television. I find it funny that you somehow deem this ok, but not anything that comes from the US.

Watch CNN. Even they are telling the story of this situation, at this moment.

The Pentagon claims that the tank which fired on the hotel were responding to sniper fire.. At first they said it was the lobby, then they claimed it came from the roof, and now they claim it was from a floor in the middle of the hotel. All journalists in the hotel, including British journalists have stated they have heard absolutely no sniper fire, which presents the possibility of a silenced rifle or perhaps no sniper at all.

All that we can gather from this news, and the news of children being maimed and neighborhoods being bombed is that the "precision strikes" on regime targets aren't so precise anymore.

Yes, because we know French journalists faked the video footage.

They were trying to figure out what floor Al-jazeera was on.

It's a damn good bet they were targeting the journalists. Those news crews included people who had seen action in Bosnia, Kosovo, Chechnya and other vacation spots. They had enough experience to know when things were getting dangerous. And the tank round took them all totally by surprise.
The US wants the war reporting to come only from its tightly controlled "embeds."

Just wondering what a sniper could do to a armored tank? And how accurate is a sniper when shooting at a target from 1.5 km away? Especially with a silencer on.......

probably better than anyone else in his army. or we could go with your thinking - i can hear a army guy now. "we know there is a sniper over there in that building but for him to hit us he would have to aim higher than usual so we will just let him keep shooting at us because his chances are lower of hitting us"..

Get a psychiatrist. You REALLY need one.

You didn't answer what a sniper could do to a Abrams armored tank.

No but they can take footage, put their spin on what was going on, and make baseless accusations.

tink, tink, tink. i think that about sums that one up.

LOL! Can't refute my points, so you call me crazy?
Ottawa, eh? Are you perhaps a member of the US diplomatic corps?

who is to say that those in the tank were not planning on coming out of it and needed to clear the pathetic person that had to hide in a place where he thought he wouldn't get return fire...

yeah the media is a target. how stupid of a topic... like we need the media any more biased than it already is...

nice try though

Two points:
1. There is no evidence of any sort that there was a sniper in that building, other than the comments of a US military official who wasn't even in Baghdad at the time.
2. The media people there were from several nations and news organizations. One of those killed was working for TeleCinco, a Spanish TV network. Spain has been one of the US's (very few) strong supporters in this war.

points taken. but, how can the only evidence that there was a sniper in the building be come from a military official in another part of the country? doesn't make sense. i am sure those that were in the tanks, and in the area were well aware that a sniper was in the building at some point.

and you are proving my point even further by saying a spanish reporter was hit. this makes even less sense that we did it on purpose.

any other claims?

Yes, we're targeting journalists in Iraq. We're also intentionally trying to kill children, but they are harder to hit because they are smaller.

We'd be bombing baby milk factories and marketplaces, but we're sick of wasting million dollar missiles to do that.

kvm_mkdb, come clean: you're really the Iraqi information minister, aren't you? Nice job at the last press conference, but I haven't seen much of you lately. I wait with bated breath for your next victory speech and denouncement of the US.

hehe thats great

It wouldn't be suprising if we are targeting journalists....

They are the primary source of news for Iraqi's... we want to replace that with our feeds....

We tried taking out the news already... it keeps reappearing. So this is another logical step (though kind of criminal in a way).

It does make sense in a logistical sense for them to do this. But then again, no military should ever attack the media. Soldiers fight soldiers only.

oh boy... heh

Stratigicaly... it would be the wise thing to do. We want to cut off communication any way possible. We want to separate the population from the regime.

The primary tactic we saw was knocking out radio antenna's and such, but they kept reappearing.

An attempt to knock out the newsmakers would be the next logical step to cut of this form of communication.


I agree it's not ethical. I am in fact against such an action, as it's creates more tensions between the Arab world and the coallition...

But strategy wise, it would be a decent move.

Then the only thing for people to see/hear on the tv/radio would be coallition broadcasts.

Yes, but it is quite clear that this is not what is happening. If anything, there has been entirely unprecidented media coverage. The assertion that the US has been targeting journalists for attack is downright silly.

How is it quite clearly that it's not happening?

I have seen nothing to prove either way. You can only speculate.

It wouldn't be the first time either. We did that in WWII as well. So did the British... and the Germans did the same to the British (and Russia, for what it got to).

The nice way of doing it was taking down the radio towers... but since that failed... take down what feeds the towers.