C. Saddam refuses to let UN Inspectors in.
So would the US.
Not true... as part of the START treaties, international inspectors were allowed to verify the destruction of strategic nuclear weapons like B-52s, ICBMS, ect. And if you didn't notice... the US host
Back to the topic at hand, yes the media does have a myopic view of "the here and the now" in Iraq. Like I said in Reply 19, its the sudden, tragic event that in the grand scheme of the world means almost nothing that gains the media attention.
Where's the criticism of foreign policy going back decades into the 1950s? Where's the criticism of other western world nations doing almost nothing to support anti-terrorism measures? Where's the explination of why these events are taking place? Half the U.S. hates France, but no one can tell you why. There are very few quality, in-depth explanations of global events that actually explain why
something happened, and news flash, television news are not
A car bomb story makes great news, but does little to broaden the public's understanding of the events taking place overseas... the public doesn't understand why
insurgents are blowing the crap out of Iraqi civilians and thus wouldn't mind a bit if the Middle East were just carpet bombed into a parking lot. That's
scary any way you look at it...
I don’t like playing the “maybe” game, but maybe
if media sources put a pair of bifocals on their near-sighted perspective on global events, a war against fundamental terrorism would have been much more productive. Don’t get me wrong, I still believe invading Iraq was the right course of action (if you don’t, fine), but I’m of the opinion, that the media’s utter failure
to weigh the magnitude of events leading up to, and during the initial invasion are almost as much to blame as our elected leaders.
We placed our trust in them, and they violated it.
[Edited 2005-01-20 05:00:51]
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.