This link is a reminder that there are actual Americans dying overseas, fighting a war that doesn’t make the TV. The one aspect of this story I find most interesting is that hardly anyone is aware because the news media is not covering events in Afghanistan. It’s not that Libya has pushed Afghanistan to the back pages, it just isn’t news worthy anymore when young Americans die on the battlefield.
I don’t know if most of you recall, but during the Iraq War, it was a nightly occurrence for the news media to report on the daily, monthly and running total number of American deaths. In fact, at one point, there was a big brouhaha over TV cameras at Dover AFB when the dead American caskets were to be offloaded. Is it no longer news-worthy because deaths of Americans are no longer worth the network’s time and effort? Or is this omission for other reasons? I have my own opinions about that and since this is my blog and I opinionate on a regular basis I will tell you what it is. Before, Iraq and Afghanistan were Bush’s wars and with the media having a decidedly left-leaning tilt, it was self-serving to report how “badly things were going” over there. But now that wars are on Obama’s lap, the press is less interested in pointing out that Americans are dying overseas fighting the war on terror (or in the words of the Obama Administration, Oversea Contingency).
Can you believe that Obama wants to involve us in yet another war? Why is he helping Libya, but not Syria? It is not our place to get involved, as we are not directly threatened and why is there no coverage criticizing his decisions?
ReplyDeleteHave you noticed also, that Germany is getting rid of their UN alliances and buddying up with middle eastern countries. Their economic and military focus is to now tie in with the middle east, just like in WWI and WWII. How come we don't hear about that? I am wondering how all these shifts in alliances among the countries are going to pan out. Your thoughts?
Rose, The one thing that has me most concerned about the Libya situation is Obama's lack of checking in with Congress. Strictly based on the War Powers Act, he has 60 days to discuss his actions with Congress, but in times past, other Presidents, at a bare minimum, have at least spoken to key members before moving forward with plans. Reagan did it with Grenada, Bush One did it before Kuwait and Panama, Clinton did it before Bosnia, and Bush Two before Iraq and Afghanistan. This attack on Libya came as a complete surprise to our representatives. You also have to love how the liberal media has not held Obama's feet to the fire. Some have even gone as far as to lie about President Bush, saying he did not talk to Congress before initiating action in both Iraq and Afghanistan, which he did do. They were also big on saying how Obama cobbled together this wonderful coalition of the willing, neglecting to say that Bush did the same thing for both actions and also not bothering to mention that both of Bush's coalitions were larger than the one Obama put together.
ReplyDeleteYes, the Germany issue does have me concerned. But what would anyone expect. Europe has become a de-facto part of the Middle East with the high immigration rates and the governments bending to muslim demands for sharia law and what-not. It would not surprise me if France did the same thing in the very near future. The current leader of France, Sarkozy, will most likely not be long for his leadership role as the people of France will most likely get rid of him. They have grown tired of his tough stances on immigration and budgets and the French people have liked their socialist system for too long.