Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Really quite pissed off with the whole thing now.

In case the media haven't realised, Britain is fighting a War in Afghanistan. And what happens during War? Why thats right! You get casualtes on both sides. Now it is incredibly tragic that the UK has lost 18 brave souls in the past few weeks, but in the grand scheme of things, thats still a very low kill count for the enemy. Granted we're not told of the number of injured soldiers, but even so.

Spoken to a couple of my assosciates who are in the army and have been deployed to Afghanistan, it quickly becomes apparent that on a kill for kill ratio, the Taliban are 100% getting their arses kicked. But hey, don't give us any cheery news will you Mr Media? Nope, you keep on with the sensationalist bs you are so fond of.

Like the apparent 'lack' of combat and transport Helicopters available to British troops. Lets look at the question the media likes to ask, and see if anyone else can spot it's flaw..... 'Do your troops have enough Helicopters?'

Well, no, they don't. When it comes to a theatre of war, I very much doubt it's possible to have too much of any kind of equipment. The more you have, the quicker the job can be done etc. So why not ask the people you are questioning 'Do you have too few Helicopters?' Much better question. According to one of the guys I was talking too, they do have literally enough. They could of course use more, but what they do have is capable of getting the job done, just later rather than sooner.

But of course, all this reporting is in the right wing gutter press, who rather than being concerned about our lads out in war, it's about discrediting Gordon Brown. Like he hasn't managed that himself.

Stupid bloody media. Perhaps we could use them for Mine Clearance duty?

that on a kill for kill ratio, the Taliban are 100% getting their arses kicked.

True, but I would suggest that in this particular war we are fighting kill for kill ratio is generally irrelevant.

*note avoidance of crass 40k comparison*.

I think the media is in a no win situation here to be honest.

If they do report casualties, equipment problems etc etc then they are accused of providing succour for the enemy, and if they don't then they are collaborators with the EVIL govt. machinery.

I'd rather they collaborate with their own Government than be treacherous arseholes on the hunt for another copy sold.

I feel sorry for the troops families.

And they do co operate, they try to be very careful with reports of troop movements, etc etc.

But I don't see how the media is helping if it aids the Govt. in covering up appalling mismanagement and/or shortcomings with the services our soldiers are given.

I'll grant you if we were on a total war footing, like WW II or similar then yes, reporting would and indeed is a different matter.

News sources will only report on the bad side of things because thats what gets people to watch. And the more they get to watch, the higher their ratings go and the more they can charge for advertising. News is just another facet of the entertainment industry now. It's all about cash in the end.

So yeah, they're going to continue to give you body counts every day and tell you how much everyone is suffering, until something else becomes more important to them like Brittney Spears being stupid again.

I think once our armed forces accomplish some more tangible goals in Afghanistan beyond killing random Taliban sneaking across the border, you'll see the media trumpet it.

@gorgon

I think once our armed forces accomplish some more tangible goals in Afghanistan beyond killing random Taliban sneaking across the border, you'll see the media trumpet it.

I'd imagine they will be trumpting the latest reality TV strumpet or MP scandal when that next happens just like all the times before it! As we know the fact is it doesn't sell copy, you can't show taliban/insurgents being given a sound trashing which means the TV aren't interested (wouldn't like to upset the little bliters now would we).

Unfortunately the media are too interested in recreating the sort of national mourning and hoping that people will burst into tears in the street ala the whole self-flagallation created by the whole Princess Di crash to worry about some progress in Afghanistan or even the amazing story of the brave lads and ladies actually doing the work.

We should be used to the media by now, but they never fail to find a new low or indeed low cut dress! (don't get me wrong I really don't have a problem with boobs!)

Oh sure, trash sells. Rupert Murdoch's built an empire on it.

But what should the media be reporting about the conflict? I read articles almost every day about Afghanistan. They're out there. They aren't headline news, though, and that's because there isn't anything headline-worthy to talk about. Yes, our troops are sacrificing bravely, and the Taliban are taking casualties. But you can't run the same headline every day.

"New" is what really drives "news". Like I said, after our armed forces achieve a more tangible objective, you'll see the media give them their due.

Interestingly, I feel the lack of reports on how badly the Taliban suck at fisticuffs is a mistake.

For example, more than a few enemy fighter have been captured, and discovered to be British Muslims.

How much would it hurt the 'radicalisation' of young men if they learnt that you go to the training camp, you get given a clapped out ex-Russian rifle, and promptly get shot to buggery by troops better trained, better equipped and better supported than you? I'm willing to be it would be food for thought.

Whilst I don't want to see anyone reveling the kill count on either side, to expose both gives a better picture of what exactly is going on.

I would mention more, but as they said in WW2, careless talk costs lives, and I'm not sure how much one of my sources told me is meant to be public knowledge. And yes, this is a nerd sight, and I very much doubt there is a potential 'insurgent' amongst us, but I respect the dude enough to keep schtum, just in case. After all, I'm sure we've all told someone something we probably shouldn't have, and trusted them not to tell others!

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: and I very much doubt there is a potential 'insurgent' amongst us,

...well you say that ...but.. cm'on.... Killkrazy? ...and if you run Mr. Frazzled's posts through your super secret decoder ring you'll find his posts are full of pro Islamic subliminal messages* and hatred for western society. Note how they both clamp down on any threads were criticsim of God is made...

And Mr. Frazzled's tribute to the tragic death of his eladers son...

*bar-be-que = terrorist code for firebombing.

Uh oh...I've been found out...

Wait, its not terrorism, its freedom for Parakeets Everyone.

No Parakeet Freedom, no Peace!

You can take their honey sticks, but you'll never take...their freedom!!!