ABC news anchor Bob Woodruff seriously injured in Iraq

IdahoMom said:
But our American troops would be the first people he'd want to see with guns blazing of he was kidnapped and threatened with beheading! Damn hypocrites!

That is so true. :clap:
 
calus_3 said:
I hope they both recover but I have little sympathy for them. They were over there trying to find bad news to report because they hate GWB. They weren't visiting the schools or the newly elected women officials or the hospitals. They were in a war zone and if I understand correctly were trying to pursue some angle about how the Iraqi humvees aren't as armored as ours are...not sure what the insinuation is.

I have a buddy over there now and the pain in the a$$ reporter embedded with them...I think he works for the AJC....is constantly trying to stir up trouble. Any time there is action, he is second guessing the troops asking questions like "did you really have to kill him?" and trying to get the troups to say controversial things right after a firefight or an IED goes off. Most of the time, he is simply in their way.

I told my buddy when he first left that "if you have an embedded reporter with you and the fighting gets intense, SHOOT THE REPORTER FIRST. They are not on your side". I meant it.

Cal

That is about as mean and pathetic a post as I have seen on WS.
 
Marthatex said:
That is about as mean and pathetic a post as I have seen on WS.
With all due respect Marthatex, I disagree.
He's not attacking a poster. The jist of his post (correct me calus if I'm wrong) is that the soldiers are there putting their lives on the line!! The reporters are a hindrance and are there trying to find dirt. Our troops shouldn't have to worry about an imbed's spin in the middle of a flipping war!
 
IdahoMom said:
But our American troops would be the first people he'd want to see with guns blazing if he was kidnapped and threatened with beheading! Damn hypocrites!
:D great post :clap:
 
IdahoMom said:
But our American troops would be the first people he'd want to see with guns blazing if he was kidnapped and threatened with beheading! Damn hypocrites!

Very true. Great post!
 
IdahoMom said:
With all due respect Marthatex, I disagree.
He's not attacking a poster. The jist of his post (correct me calus if I'm wrong) is that the soldiers are there putting their lives on the line!! The reporters are a hindrance and are there trying to find dirt. Our troops shouldn't have to worry about an imbed's spin in the middle of a flipping war!

Precisely.....I am not happy they got hurt and sincerely hope that they recover. But my point is that right before they got hit, they apparently switched to an Iraqi humvee....the same humvee that they were supposedly there to expose as being unsafe. I guess the insinuation would be that we don't care about Iraqi soldiers. IMHO, it was just another attempt to gnaw at the edges of the war and stir up dust.

Let me give you a for example....the Palestinian conflict with Israel. I saw this series of pictures one time of this beautiful brown eyed Palestinian boy and his father. The boy and the father were crouched down behind this concrete wall. The father had a gun and was shooting at a TANK. The pictures were taken from across the street. This little boy was absolutely petrified and wailing and crying. Moments later, the tank blew them both up. I have nothing but spite, anger, and hatred for that dad who would drag his 7 year old son out there to die like that. I have nothing but pity for the little boy who should be alive today. That's the difference.

If the stories about these two men were true (in actuality the cameraman was probably just there doing a job) then they were looking to prove something. Well, they certainly proved it...now didn't they?

As for reporters getting in the way why is it that we only see images of the soldier shooting the wounded man in that house and not our soldiers giving candy and clothing to the kids (BTW all you haters it was stuff sent from hom to the soldiers)? There is a media bias against the President and it is clear. Show the bad stuff, hide the good, make up the rest (can you say What is the Frequency Kenneth?......I would say about every 2 seconds Danny boy)

Cal
 
Marthatex said:
That is about as mean and pathetic a post as I have seen on WS.

Well, stay tuned because I can do a LOT better than THIS! :D

Cal
 
calus_3 said:
Precisely.....I am not happy they got hurt and sincerely hope that they recover. But my point is that right before they got hit, they apparently switched to an Iraqi humvee....the same humvee that they were supposedly there to expose as being unsafe. I guess the insinuation would be that we don't care about Iraqi soldiers. IMHO, it was just another attempt to gnaw at the edges of the war and stir up dust.

Let me give you a for example....the Palestinian conflict with Israel. I saw this series of pictures one time of this beautiful brown eyed Palestinian boy and his father. The boy and the father were crouched down behind this concrete wall. The father had a gun and was shooting at a TANK. The pictures were taken from across the street. This little boy was absolutely petrified and wailing and crying. Moments later, the tank blew them both up. I have nothing but spite, anger, and hatred for that dad who would drag his 7 year old son out there to die like that. I have nothing but pity for the little boy who should be alive today. That's the difference.

If the stories about these two men were true (in actuality the cameraman was probably just there doing a job) then they were looking to prove something. Well, they certainly proved it...now didn't they?

As for reporters getting in the way why is it that we only see images of the soldier shooting the wounded man in that house and not our soldiers giving candy and clothing to the kids (BTW all you haters it was stuff sent from hom to the soldiers)? There is a media bias against the President and it is clear. Show the bad stuff, hide the good.

Cal

:clap: :clap: :clap:

Must agree totally! OT, but wasn't Hillary and the gang in fine form last night? Sitting on their hands during the standing o's? Howling like Junior High students when the failed Social Security effort was brought up?

Eve
 
I hope they have a quick recovery. I understand as a reporter/anchor you may have to accept the assignments. But you have a great point Cal. They are using OUR forces to get a news story.(to interview,for security,for rides) Which is not the reason they were suppose to be there. I realize in the times of quick as a cat news it may not be a ratings bonanza, but I would feel they would want to keep their reporters safe and out of danger AND not bother the Armed forces..



God Bless.

Thanks for reading my post!:blowkiss:
 
I wish the news reporters God speed in recovering / I wish all of our injured troops the very same dignity as the reporters.
 
Marthatex said:
That is about as mean and pathetic a post as I have seen on WS.
I agree Marthatex. Thank you.
 
cheko1 said:
It definately is!!


I disagree. Cal made some great points. What was mean and pathetic about it? Many believe that often U.S. reporters' coverage is intentionally negative, anti-Bush/war. I have to say that's what I observe and I think that is mean and pathetic.

Eve
 
eve said:
I disagree. Cal made some great points. What was mean and pathetic about it? Many believe that often U.S. reporters' coverage is intentionally negative, anti-Bush/war. I have to say that's what I observe and I think that is mean and pathetic.

Eve
Add to that the fact there is the underlying expectation the military will protect them. Protect them at them at the expense of themselves, or other soldiers?

I think the imbeds can go over there-just don't expect a soldier underfire to cover their hineys!
 
I can understand our soldiers being upset at the news coverage of the injuries to Woodruff and Vogt. While the injuries to Woodruff, and Vogt, are certainly serious, they aren't nearly as devastating as many of the injuries that so many of our soldiers have suffered, and where was the fanfare for them.

Our soldiers don't have a choice of whether, or not, to be in a war zone. Not to demean them, but, Woodruff, and Vogt, had a choice, and yes, protecting, and saving embedded reporters lives, at the risk of their own safety, does put our soldiers at risk. Unnecessarily so.
 
Buzzm1 said:
I can understand our soldiers being upset at the news coverage of the injuries to Woodruff and Vogt. While the injuries to Woodruff, and Vogt, are certainly serious, they aren't nearly as devastating as many of the injuries that so many of our soldiers have suffered, and where was the fanfare for them.

Our soldiers don't have a choice whether to be in a war zone, or not. Not to demean them, but, Woodruff, and Vogt, had a choice.
Very well said.
 
calus_3 said:
I hope they both recover but I have little sympathy for them. They were over there trying to find bad news to report because they hate GWB. They weren't visiting the schools or the newly elected women officials or the hospitals. They were in a war zone and if I understand correctly were trying to pursue some angle about how the Iraqi humvees aren't as armored as ours are...not sure what the insinuation is.

I have a buddy over there now and the pain in the a$$ reporter embedded with them...I think he works for the AJC....is constantly trying to stir up trouble. Any time there is action, he is second guessing the troops asking questions like "did you really have to kill him?" and trying to get the troups to say controversial things right after a firefight or an IED goes off. Most of the time, he is simply in their way.

I told my buddy when he first left that "if you have an embedded reporter with you and the fighting gets intense, SHOOT THE REPORTER FIRST. They are not on your side". I meant it.

Cal
If the media is that big of a pain in the azz to the troops then they need to take it to the higher ups & get them banned from the field. GWB lets the media trail along with the troops & apparently ask the questions they want answered for the reports seen on TV.

Your comment about shooting the reporter first is a cold & callous statement. They are doing there jobs & as stated above if they're in the way make them stay out. Very easily done for the Generals with authority.
 
cheko1 said:
If the media is that big of a pain in the azz to the troops then they need to take it to the higher ups & get them banned from the field. GWB lets the media trail along with the troops & apparently ask the questions they want answered for the reports seen on TV.

Your comment about shooting the reporter first is a cold & callous statement. They are doing there jobs & as stated above if they're in the way make them stay out. Very easily done for the Generals with authority.

Well on that we agree. This is war and there is no place for an imbedded reporter. For each reporter that my buddy's unit takes along, they have to leave one soldier behind.

Cold, calus (calus_3 actually), and while the sentiment is true both the soldier and I knew that it was rediculous. Maybe just wound one from time to time. :D

Cal
 
calus_3 said:
Well on that we agree. This is war and there is no place for an imbedded reporter. For each reporter that my buddy's unit takes along, they have to leave one soldier behind.

Cold, calus (calus_3 actually), and while the sentiment is true both the soldier and I knew that it was rediculous. Maybe just wound one from time to time. :D

Cal
Well that should never be allowed in the first place.........but our government lets it happen.

We have a very dear friend in the green zone / we worry & pray for him everyday!
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
99
Guests online
809
Total visitors
908

Forum statistics

Threads
589,927
Messages
17,927,758
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top