All journalists should be embedded

[Anthony Ng]

If all journalists are embedded, this would not happen:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=sto...ap_on_re_mi_ea/war_journalist_hotel&printer=1

Or is it the othe way round that the American military tries to send a message to the news media that those who are reporting independently will be shot?

 

[Whois-Search]

John Simpson's Report who was embedded, was shocking to see blood on the camera ......... Americans again bombed them

 

[Anthony Ng]

I guess he's embedded with the wrong troops (British) or is it that the Daily Mirror has been well known for their anti-war stand?

 

[Sharpy]

Ya but gee they have there priorities straight, Top headline is the real news! sad really.

 

[JMJ]

Most of them are complete idiots for being in a hostile country running free anyway. What about the ones that got slaughtered by the Iraqi thugs. I think you're asking for trouble doing the things some of these reporters do.

 

[izoot]

They know what the risks are...no one forced them to go.

If they are not embedded theres probably a reason for it. Most of these guys will do anything for a story or picture and most are adrenilen junkies as well...

I regret the loss of life...but they know the risks....this is a war and these things happen.

Sorry to sound matter of fact but they know the risk to get that story or picture.

 

[Sharpy]

Originally posted by izoot
If they are not embedded theres probably a reason for it.

Yes there is. They're not American or British. Why do you think the embeded system was implemented? The people who are at war want the story told their way. Yes we have unprecidented war coverage, just the way Rumsfeld wants it. Nice friendly play-by-play from the embedded media. The international (unilatteral)press can't get to most places and when they do, they show their press passes to armed guards and are turned away because their passes say UNILATTERAL and not EMBEDDED. Wouldn't it be nice to hear a frontline report from someone who is not showering/shaving/eating/sleeping/laughing/crying etc with the coalition forces?

I have stayed away from war related threads because it does no good to argue for one side or the other. No one here is going to change anyones mind/feelings about this situation. Because fellings run so deep about the war on both sides, posting has a better chance of making DNF foes than it does solving anything. I had to comment on this thread as I have a cousin who is in Iraq and is a member of the non-embedded press.

Cheers

 

[StockDoctor]

This kind of stuff can be blamed directly on Iraq (imho). The debate is about the "Rules of War" regarding civilian dress, with the Iraqi fighters "embedding" themselves among the jounalists or their own civilians. Remember, ALL is fair in Love and War, right? I agree from one point of view, but that view needs to be clarified. From the Iraqi view, it's ok to dress as civilians, or do "anything" they can to stop the US infidels. Who are these US to set the rules of war for them? I agree, they shouldn't be expected to follow ANY rules set by the US (or anyone else), and the US shouldn't expect them to. The rules of war in this matter are not to be set by the opposing side. The rules should be set and imposed on your own side. Not posing in civilian dress or using them for cover is a rule of war that Iraq should be imposing on THEMSELVES for the protection of their people. Changing from a military uniform into civilian dress puts your OWN people at risk. It's obvious by these actions that they have NO concern for the lives of their own people. Expecting to see no impact of Iraqs decision on those they use as shields is naive.