Sanchez: Media's Reporting of Iraq War Endangered Soldiers' Lives

[Logan13]

Sanchez: Media's Reporting of Iraq War Endangered Soldiers' Lives
fox news
WASHINGTON — The former top commander of coalition forces in Iraq may have called U.S. efforts there catastrophically flawed and unrealistically optimistic, but much of the criticism of the media by Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez has been left unreported.

In his speech to the Military Reporters and Editors Association in Washington, D.C., on Friday, Sanchez accused reporters of "unscrupulous reporting, solely focused on supporting an agenda and preconceived notions of the U.S. military."

Without naming a specific company, Sanchez said "parent media organizations" have political agendas that direct the news coverage of the war and in some cases put U.S. service members in deadly situations.

"What is clear to me is that you are perpetuating the corrosive partisan politics that is destroying our country and killing our service members who are at war. My assessment is that your profession, to some, has strayed from these ethical standards and allowed external agendas to manipulate what the American public sees on TV, reads in newspapers and what they see on the Web," Sanchez said.

In his speech Friday, Sanchez took aim at nearly everyone in Washington — from Congress to the State Department, the National Security Council to the Pentagon — for the conduct of the war, which he said had become "a nightmare with no end in sight." He also saved no criticism for the current surge policy proposed by current Multinational Forces in Iraq commander Gen. David Petraeus and seen largely as a success.

The Other Sanchez Complaint "The latest 'revised strategy' is a desperate attempt by an administration that has not accepted the political and economic realities of this war and they have definitely not communicated that reality to the American people," he said.

Regardless of his pessimism, Sanchez said that a full-scale withdrawal is not currently an option.

"The American military finds itself in an intractable situation ... America has no choice but to continue our efforts in Iraq," said Sanchez, who works as a consultant training U.S. generals.

The White House offered only a polite response to the remarks, which are not Sanchez's first criticisms to be aired publicly.

"We appreciate his service to the country. As General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker said, there's more work to be done but progress is being made in Iraq. And that's what we're focused on now," said White House Deputy Press Secretary Tony Fratto.

Many military experts have said they worry that the latest attacks could jeopardize efforts to do right in Iraq. Some note that Sanchez was part of the old strategy, and had a chance to make the operation work while he was in command.

"He has clearly said some things that are correct. But I think the negatives are coming more out and he was one of the key persons responsible for the strategy," said retired Gen. Tom McInerney, a FOX News analyst.

Sanchez told the gathering that he thought he had made mistakes and said he didn't always fully appreciate the secondary affects of actions the military took. He denied reports that he and then-Iraqi administrator L. Paul Bremer were not on speaking terms, saying they spoke daily.

Sanchez also took issue with the press over their indictments of his service. Sanchez retired in 2006 after being replaced in Iraq following the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal. He was cleared of wrongdoing but became a symbol in some media accounts of flawed leadership.

He acknowledged that much of his career will now be seen through the lens of the Abu Ghraib scandal, and blamed that in part on what he called biased coverage of the scandal in the Stars and Stripes newspaper.

"Over the course of this war, tactically insignificant events have become strategic defeats for America because of the tremendous power and impact of the media and by extension, you the journalist," Sanchez said.

Responding to the comments by Sanchez, Robb Grindstaff, executive editor of Stars and Stripes said Sunday, "We have an organizational policy not to talk to other media about our stories. We don't comment."

Sanchez, on the other hand, isn't done talking. He has reportedly considering writing a book and promises to name names in his blunt talk about the handling of the Iraq war by government officials and the media.

[Tock]

fox news

Well, that's Fox News, for ya.

Got a reputable source for this story?

[RA]

News sources are 99% lib and 1% conservative. Where you want it from?

Well, that's Fox News, for ya.

Got a reputable source for this story?

[Tock]

News sources are 99% lib and 1% conservative. Where you want it from?

Not true.

Big multi-national corporations own NBC, ABC, and CBS. And Cable TV stations, too. General Electric owns one (I forget which one), as does Disney, Sony, and etc etc. (we've covered this ground before). Those corporations exist first and foremost to make a profit for their shareholders; the journalists at NBC, for example, won't be too aggressive about pursuing stories that put their corporate masters (GE) in a bad light--not if they have career ambitions, anyway.

But as far as Fox News goes, well, those people routinely color the news to slant it to favor the Republican party. (we've covered this ground before, too) They're ok for entertainment, like Rush Limbaugh. But as far as reliable sources of information, ha . . . get real . . .

[Logan13]

Not true.

Big multi-national corporations own NBC, ABC, and CBS. And Cable TV stations, too. General Electric owns one (I forget which one), as does Disney, Sony, and etc etc. (we've covered this ground before). Those corporations exist first and foremost to make a profit for their shareholders; the journalists at NBC, for example, won't be too aggressive about pursuing stories that put their corporate masters (GE) in a bad light--not if they have career ambitions, anyway.

But as far as Fox News goes, well, those people routinely color the news to slant it to favor the Republican party. (we've covered this ground before, too) They're ok for entertainment, like Rush Limbaugh. But as far as reliable sources of information, ha . . . get real . . .

bullshit. In that thread I posted where these companies and their parent companies donated political money. 75%+ went to the left............Quit talking out of your ass. The facts do not support your stance. Except it and move on.

http://www.opensecrets.org/

Here is the list of the 100 biggest political donors since 1989:
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.asp?order=A

Here is the link to search for soft money donors, both individuals and companies:
http://www.opensecrets.org/softmoney/index.asp

And finally here is the form that you must fill out (for the FEC):
http://www.fec.gov/pdf/forms/fecfrm13.pdf

[RA]

You have to be bullshitting me tock to even imply NBC CBS and ABC arent liberal. Any open minded person could watch any of them for one week and know that they were lib.

Not true.

Big multi-national corporations own NBC, ABC, and CBS. And Cable TV stations, too. General Electric owns one (I forget which one), as does Disney, Sony, and etc etc. (we've covered this ground before). Those corporations exist first and foremost to make a profit for their shareholders; the journalists at NBC, for example, won't be too aggressive about pursuing stories that put their corporate masters (GE) in a bad light--not if they have career ambitions, anyway.

But as far as Fox News goes, well, those people routinely color the news to slant it to favor the Republican party. (we've covered this ground before, too) They're ok for entertainment, like Rush Limbaugh. But as far as reliable sources of information, ha . . . get real . . .

[Tock]

You have to be bullshitting me tock to even imply NBC CBS and ABC arent liberal. Any open minded person could watch any of them for one week and know that they were lib.

Depends on your perspective, I guess.

When the news is reporting on the nonsense that your government group is doing, then it's "the liberal media." But when it's broadcasting a sympathetic program about Republican shills lik Rush Limbaugh or Clarence Thomas, then it's "fair and balanced."

Nevertheless, regardless of what source your information comes from, it's ALL suspect. As Ronald Reagan once quipped about agreements with the Soviet Union, "Trust, but verify." All of us would do well to do the same.

[Tock]

Except it and move on.

Just out of curiousity, Logan -- are you a native speaker of English?

[RA]

Show me one truly sympathetic program about Rush on those I mentioned. Show me the "poop" or whatever you like to call it

Depends on your perspective, I guess.

When the news is reporting on the nonsense that your government group is doing, then it's "the liberal media." But when it's broadcasting a sympathetic program about Republican shills lik Rush Limbaugh or Clarence Thomas, then it's "fair and balanced."

Nevertheless, regardless of what source your information comes from, it's ALL suspect. As Ronald Reagan once quipped about agreements with the Soviet Union, "Trust, but verify." All of us would do well to do the same.

[Logan13]

Just out of curiousity, Logan -- are you a native speaker of English?

The difference between you and I is that I do not take the time to point out insignificant grammatical errors. But I understand that since you can not get the upperhand in a debate with me, you must use such a measure to deflect the discussion.

[Tock]

The difference between you and I is that I do not take the time to point out insignificant grammatical errors. But I understand that since you can not get the upperhand in a debate with me, you must use such a measure to deflect the discussion.

Not at all.

An insignificant grammatical error, like a misplaced comma or hyphen would be one thing. But using words that have no hope of making sense in any possible contextual use, well, that's something else entirely; something that a native speaker should be able to avoid. At least, reasonably so.

Today's homework:
Look up the words "Accept" and "Except" in a dictionary, write the definition, in longhand, on paper. Use both words in a sentence.

[Logan13]

Not at all.

An insignificant grammatical error, like a misplaced comma or hyphen would be one thing. But using words that have no hope of making sense in any possible contextual use, well, that's something else entirely; something that a native speaker should be able to avoid. At least, reasonably so.

Today's homework:
Look up the words "Accept" and "Except" in a dictionary, write the definition, in longhand, on paper. Use both words in a sentence.

sure it is........ while your preaching, how about going back into your other post and learn how to spell independents
You were picked on as a child, weren't you..........

[Tock]

Sanchez: Media's Reporting of Iraq War Endangered Soldiers' Lives
fox news
WASHINGTON — The former top commander of coalition forces in Iraq may have called U.S. efforts there catastrophically flawed and unrealistically optimistic, but much of the criticism of the media by Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez has been left unreported.

It turns out it's been "left unreported" because Gen. Sanchez never said the things that this story reports. It is a work of fiction.
Fox News is run by a bunch of liars.

In his speech to the Military Reporters and Editors Association in Washington, D.C., on Friday, Sanchez accused reporters of "unscrupulous reporting, solely focused on supporting an agenda and preconceived notions of the U.S. military."

Do you have a link to this story? I haven't found it anywhere, and no references to anything like this anywhere.

I'm calling this story Bulsheet.

[Logan13]

It turns out it's been "left unreported" because Gen. Sanchez never said the things that this story reports. It is a work of fiction.
Fox News is run by a bunch of liars.

Do you have a link to this story? I haven't found it anywhere, and no references to anything like this anywhere.

I'm calling this story Bulsheet.

did you get your spelling changed as of yet?

[Tock]

did you get your spelling changed as of yet?

I'll tell you what.

I'll get a spell-checker, and you get a dictionary AND a news source that doesn't lie.

Deal?

[Logan13]

I'll tell you what.

I'll get a spell-checker, and you get a dictionary AND a news source that doesn't lie.

Deal?

The village voice is not the only news source out there..........

[Tock]

The village voice is not the only news source out there..........

I'll take that as a YES.

[Logan13]

I'll take that as a YES.

when you get a backbone, let me know..........

[Tock]

When you get a news source that doesn't falsify information, let me know.

You still haven't come up with verification for this news story. I haven't found any corroboration for this story either. Looks to me like another example of how Fox News spreads lies and dis-information to Americans.

[rock75]

Sorry but I have to side with Tock on this - I watch Fox for my local news and weather and that is it - anything having to do political I change the channel - Logan and Beef the hardest thing for you to do is to admit that Fox is biased to the Republican party; but that would be the "right" thing to do.

I am also the first to admit that there is not one news reporting agency that speaks the truth; each party has their own avenues of getting their side of the story to the public, please note how I said "their side" and not the truth, the american public and the rest of the world cannot handle the "truth" about the current administration and how fuc ked up our government really is.

[RANA]

The news media sucks, way too much bs and spin. Yes libs have too much control of it, not just in America but all of Western Europe and South/Central America

[Logan13]

Sorry but I have to side with Tock on this - I watch Fox for my local news and weather and that is it - anything having to do political I change the channel - Logan and Beef the hardest thing for you to do is to admit that Fox is biased to the Republican party; but that would be the "right" thing to do.

I am also the first to admit that there is not one news reporting agency that speaks the truth; each party has their own avenues of getting their side of the story to the public, please note how I said "their side" and not the truth, the american public and the rest of the world cannot handle the "truth" about the current administration and how fuc ked up our government really is.

I have never said that Fox does not lean to the right. This is why they have become the #1 cable news channel.......people are tired of all the other media regurgitating liberal propaganda.

[Tock]

I have never said that Fox does not lean to the right. This is why they have become the #1 cable news channel.......people are tired of all the other media regurgitating liberal propaganda.

Fox News does more than "lean to the Right."

Fox News blatantly misrepresents fiction (such as the nonsense you began this thread with) as news, hoping the gullible accept its propaganda for truth.

Maybe you view this as a good thing, but I certainly don't.

[Logan13]

Fox News does more than "lean to the Right."

Fox News blatantly misrepresents fiction (such as the nonsense you began this thread with) as news, hoping the gullible accept its propaganda for truth.

Maybe you view this as a good thing, but I certainly don't.

Next Time, look for the answers instead of looking to your lefty blogs for the "truth".......

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS.../iraq.sanchez/

National efforts to date have been corrupted by partisan politics that have prevented us from devising an effective, executable and supportable strategies," he said. "At times, these partisan struggles have led us to political decisions that endangered the lives of our sons and daughters on the battlefield. The unmistakable message was that political power had greater priority than our national security objectives."

"Overcoming this strategic failure is the first step toward achieving victory in Iraq," he said. "Without bipartisan cooperation, we are doomed to fail. There is nothing going on today in Washington that would give us hope."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21272663/
Asked whether he is happy with the investigation and prosecutions in the case, Sanchez answered sarcastically, "Is America happy with destroying the careers and the reputations of everyone in the military chain of command involved in Abu Ghraib?"

Sanchez also railed on the media during his speech, saying that many people covering the war have political agendas and little concern about collateral damage when their stories are wrong. These members of the media are doing "a tremendous disservice to America," he said.

[Tock]

Next Time, look for the answers instead of looking to your lefty blogs for the "truth".......

Um, maybe you didn't notice, but you're the one who just cited CNN and MSNBC. Or don't you consider them Liberal anymore?

Regardless, neither of the news sources you cited corroborate the flatulent BS you began this thread with from Fox News:

Sanchez: Media's Reporting of Iraq War Endangered Soldiers' Lives
fox news

You posted a story from Fox News, don't you have the website for it?

[Logan13]

Um, maybe you didn't notice, but you're the one who just cited CNN and MSNBC. Or don't you consider them Liberal anymore?

Regardless, neither of the news sources you cited corroborate the flatulent BS you began this thread with from Fox News:

Sanchez: Media's Reporting of Iraq War Endangered Soldiers' Lives
fox news

You posted a story from Fox News, don't you have the website for it?

sites which stated the entire Sanchez press conference, since Fox was not telling you everything.............. Go to Fox news, you can't be that lazy all of the time..........

[rock75]

I have never said that Fox does not lean to the right. This is why they have become the #1 cable news channel.......people are tired of all the other media regurgitating liberal propaganda.

hahahaha the #1 cable news channel - like I said for local news and weather, for real reporting on world issues they are not worth a sh it.

[Logan13]

hahahaha the #1 cable news channel - like I said for local news and weather

you cannot argue facts..........

[Tock]

you cannot argue facts..........

I dunno about that -- you're pretty good at it . . .

[Logan13]

I dunno about that -- you're pretty good at it . . .

give an example of where I argued against a FACT.