Fun with Propaganda

[Evil Chris]

"The U.S. government is soliciting proposals for an 'aggressive' and comprehensive PR and advertising push in Iraq to convey military and diplomatic goals to Iraqis and gain their support." The contract will be with the Multi National Corps-Iraq; British PR firm Bell Pottinger did similar work for MNC-I's predecessor, the Coalition Provisional Authority. The campaign will include "outreach to various segments of Iraqi society" and setting up a "Rebuttal Cell," to "immediately and effectively" challenge "reports that unfairly target the Coalition or Coalition interests." The PR plan contrasts with news of a U.S. National Intelligence Estimate that "spells out a dark assessment of prospects for Iraq." Source: O'Dwyer's PR Daily (sub. req'd.), September 16, 2004

[Rolo]

Fight fire with fire...

[RawAlex]

Originally posted by Rolo@Sep 17 2004, 02:19 PM
Fight fire with fire...
end up with nothing but ashes.

Alex

[Buff]

Originally posted by RawAlex+Sep 17 2004, 01:40 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (RawAlex @ Sep 17 2004, 01:40 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Rolo@Sep 17 2004, 02:19 PM
Fight fire with fire...
end up with nothing but ashes.

Alex [/b][/quote]
Really? So no one has ever won a war I guess.

[Rolo]

Originally posted by RawAlex@Sep 17 2004, 11:40 AM
end up with nothing but ashes.
Ashes are not the final product in nature... Ashes are the mineral substances left after burning. They are the part of an animal or plant that cannot be burnt.

Ashes left from animal and plants consist largely of lime, sand, soda, potash, and may have sulphur, phosphorus, zinc, copper, iron, and other elements. Add a bit of life + water, and things will grow again :-)

Ashes from clashes between ideologies are not different... hopefully it will burn out the bad parts, and give room for new life. Darwin has not let us down yet.

[PornoDoggy]

Originally posted by Buff+Sep 17 2004, 03:22 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Buff @ Sep 17 2004, 03:22 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Originally posted by RawAlex@Sep 17 2004, 01:40 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Rolo@Sep 17 2004, 02:19 PM
Fight fire with fire...
end up with nothing but ashes.

Alex
Really? So no one has ever won a war I guess. [/b][/quote]
People have won wars.

People have won wars and lost the peace that followed (see Europe, 1919-1939).

I don't think this is a bad idea, exactly ... but if it (the PR campaign) is planned and implemented as poorly as the invasion & occupation was, you could get better results urinating into a hurricane.

[Buff]

Originally posted by PornoDoggy+Sep 17 2004, 02:29 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (PornoDoggy @ Sep 17 2004, 02:29 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Originally posted by Buff@Sep 17 2004, 03:22 PM
Originally posted by RawAlex@Sep 17 2004, 01:40 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Rolo@Sep 17 2004, 02:19 PM
Fight fire with fire...
end up with nothing but ashes.

Alex
Really? So no one has ever won a war I guess.
People have won wars.

People have won wars and lost the peace that followed (see Europe, 1919-1939).

I don't think this is a bad idea, exactly ... but if it (the PR campaign) is planned and implemented as poorly as the invasion & occupation was, you could get better results urinating into a hurricane. [/b][/quote]
I thought the invasion went well; it's the occupation that has sucked. I would rate the success of this war so far about a 35 on a scale of 1 to 100. We got Saddam and his sons, so that's pretty big. But, we're losing soldiers everyday to an insurgency that could have been prevented by sealing the borders to Iran and Syria. We didn't find WMD, although any sane person doesn't think Hussein just up and said, "Gee, I don't want WMD anymore, so I forbid all research and development programs on such." We've lost the PR campaign, in part because we didn't run Al Jazeera out before they could slant the day to day coverage; and this just goes to show the futility in fighting war with measured responses and such nonsense as recognizing "Holy cities" or "Holy buildings." If the enemy shoots at your from a place of worship, that building is no longer off limits, in my book.

But hey, this was all my chief objection from the start -- that politicians who are constrained by such insanity as political correctness were going to be calling the shots, instead of soldiers. So while it hasn't been a total disaster, it has sucked significant ass.

[PornoDoggy]

I thought that anyone who suggested that the invasion of Iraq was going to be difficult was on some serious drugs in the first place. If we're giving out grades, I'd give a 70% to the invasion, and a big fat zero to the occupation. That does not reflect poorly on the soldiers, airmen, marines, sailors and coasties serving and/or fighting over there - but it does reflect on the politicians (in and out of uniform - you don't get beyond a single star without being more of a whore than a Congressman).

The mistake was not in failing to run al Jezera out, the mistake was not in recognizing holy places - the mistake included sending in 1/3 (or less) the number of troops to properly occupy the country. The mistake included making sure the first builiding in Baghdad to receive U.S. attention was the Oil Ministry. The mistake included insisting that resistance to the occupation was strictly (or even primarilly) "foreign fighters." The mistake included listening exclusively to people saying what we wanted to hear.

[Fletch XXX]

Originally posted by Rolo@Sep 17 2004, 11:19 AM
Fight fire with fire...
:rokk:

[RawAlex]

pornodoggy, the invasion of Iraq was a very risky adventure. Based on the premise that the President used to enter the country (WMD) there was a godo chance of a biological nightmare. The agressive manner in which they invaded (and the lack of any major resistance) just showed how pitiful the country was defended, nothing else. But Bush and his buddies had NO PLAN FOR PEACE. Typical military situation, they know how to fight and guard, not how to keep the peace.

Buff, in reality, nobody "wins" a war. Both sides lose, one side loses less. There are enough dead bodies on both sides that anyone that calls "win" is kidding themselves.

Alex

[JR]

Originally posted by Buff+Sep 17 2004, 12:40 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Buff @ Sep 17 2004, 12:40 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Sep 17 2004, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by Buff@Sep 17 2004, 03:22 PM
Originally posted by RawAlex@Sep 17 2004, 01:40 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Rolo@Sep 17 2004, 02:19 PM
Fight fire with fire...
end up with nothing but ashes.

Alex
Really? So no one has ever won a war I guess.
People have won wars.

People have won wars and lost the peace that followed (see Europe, 1919-1939).

I don't think this is a bad idea, exactly ... but if it (the PR campaign) is planned and implemented as poorly as the invasion & occupation was, you could get better results urinating into a hurricane.
I thought the invasion went well; it's the occupation that has sucked. [/b][/quote]
the invasion went well because a few hundred thousand soldiers, as well as the government of iraq and top military officials and 50,000 or more of the most fanatic soldiers and security forces evaporated one day. they are still fighting today in what you call "the occupation" that sucked. an invasion is a piece of cake when almost no one is fighting.

:ph34r: