What's new
By:

"We're going to war, bro."

DasJazz said:
He's absolutely a terrorist and one with the complete backing of Iran. Do some research. The world is better off without him. Just because most people don't know who he really was does not change who the man was or what he did to people.
Click to expand...

Is the world better off with Soleimani dead and Iran steaming off to build a nuclear weapon since the United States has backed them in a corner? Is the world better off with the United States threatening the world with war crimes?

Or was the world better off with Soleimani alive and the nuclear deal in place? Is the world better off with the United States using diplomacy?
 
Political Jazz Fan said:
MSNBC’s Chris Hayes Tries to Justify Spreading Iranian Propaganda, It Does Not End Well
https://www.redstate.com/nick-arama...ding-iranian-propaganda-it-does-not-end-well/
Click to expand...

This is a good point, to point out family members of American servicemen and women stationed at those bases are hearing Chris Hayes describe what the Iranians were saying about their missile strikes. I heard that last night when Hayes was talking about it. My first thought was how did the Iranians possibly know how many Americans they had killed that quickly, and who provided them that figure? I did not think of the effect on family members, but that's a point worth raising.

On the other hand, what the Iranians were saying is part of the story, and I expect reporters to cover the entire story. When a story is unfolding, and confusion is holding sway, mistakes seem to happen nearly every time. The networks and news organizations just update in real time, but everyone seems to know that's the way it works when it's breaking news, not fully settled news. Casualty figures change, they go up, they go down. It was one gunman, not two. Just examples of mistakes that seem very common to breaking news situations.

Still, I think the powers that be at MSNBC could have told Hayes to hold off on that altogether, including any disclaimer about "not verified by Americans". Until they knew the truth of the matter. Out of respect for family members and friends who had a much greater personal stake in what was happening in Iraq. The figure quoted was intended for Iranian domestic purposes, and a sharper sensibility might have guessed that and held back spreading that "rumor", until or unless it was absolutely verified.

I don't think this is something where one actually tries to shame Hayes, however. It's the nature of the game in breaking news developments. It's unfortunate in hindsight for sure.

I think the criticism is simply because Hayes is a liberal. It cannot compare to Hannity filling his listeners minds with mindless and baseless conspiracy lies on a nightly basis, after all. No comparison whatsoever. Hayes is at least trying to cover the news honestly. Fox is trying to destroy American democracy altogether. Quite a difference.
 
The Thriller said:
Is the world better off with Soleimani dead and Iran steaming off to build a nuclear weapon since the United States has backed them in a corner? Is the world better off with the United States threatening the world with war crimes?

Or was the world better off with Soleimani alive and the nuclear deal in place? Is the world better off with the United States using diplomacy?
Click to expand...
No way to tell tbh.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Zombie said:
FWIW. I think his role as an adversary of the US has warped our view of him somewhat as a uniquely evil man
View attachment 8750
Click to expand...

Do you have a link that works in the U.S.? I could not find a link in your comment, but googled the BBC program. Problem was it said the player could only be used in the U.K.

Found the original tweet, and the thread said this link would work outside the U.K.:

https://www.aparat.com/v/TuBzI/فرما...وهای_مسلح_ایران?amp&__twitter_impression=true
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top