Comments on: An officer and a media shill http://blog.psaonline.org/2008/04/21/an-officer-and-a-media-shill/ Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:45:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Wolfpack SigO http://blog.psaonline.org/2008/04/21/an-officer-and-a-media-shill/comment-page-1/#comment-871853 Wolfpack SigO Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:25:29 +0000 http://blog.psaonline.org/?p=516#comment-871853 Point(s) taken, with the exception that Dr. Cordesman is not your average think tanker. Point(s) taken, with the exception that Dr. Cordesman is not your average think tanker.

]]> By: PK http://blog.psaonline.org/2008/04/21/an-officer-and-a-media-shill/comment-page-1/#comment-870241 PK Wed, 23 Apr 2008 20:54:07 +0000 http://blog.psaonline.org/?p=516#comment-870241 I thought your column was interesting, but really, I am disturbed by pundits' statements about how they knew these talking heads were just administration lackeys. They're missing the big issues here: First, these ex-generals were spouting administration rhetoric that they knew to be untrue because they were profiting off the war. They weren't simply believers, supporting their ex colleagues; they knew the information they was disseminating was false. Second, the broadcast media allowed themselves to be pawns in this game, and their continued silence--there has been a virtual black out of coverage by all the TV networks in question--is astonishing and deeply troubling. Torie Clarke, the architect of this propaganda campaign, is still a talking head on ABC. Shame on them. I thought your column was interesting, but really, I am disturbed by pundits’ statements about how they knew these talking heads were just administration lackeys.
They’re missing the big issues here: First, these ex-generals were spouting administration rhetoric that they knew to be untrue because they were profiting off the war. They weren’t simply believers, supporting their ex colleagues; they knew the information they was disseminating was false.
Second, the broadcast media allowed themselves to be pawns in this game, and their continued silence–there has been a virtual black out of coverage by all the TV networks in question–is astonishing and deeply troubling. Torie Clarke, the architect of this propaganda campaign, is still a talking head on ABC. Shame on them.

]]> By: David Isenberg http://blog.psaonline.org/2008/04/21/an-officer-and-a-media-shill/comment-page-1/#comment-869473 David Isenberg Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:06:25 +0000 http://blog.psaonline.org/?p=516#comment-869473 Even if what you wrote is exactly so, and I did not specifically cite Gen. Downing as an ideological water boy, pointing to one person does not refute what I wrote. First, not all, indeed, most of the analysts cited in the NYT article are not retired officers of Gen. Downing's experience and stature. Second, it is a fact that one of the best analysts on Iraq is a think tanker, i.e., Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. By the way, his analyses are backed up by numerous, immensely detailed, fact-filled reports, all of which are available on the CSIS website, which is far more than any of the analysts cited int he NYT article have ever drone. Third, having put on a uniform, and led (hopefully) troops on the battlefield, says remarkably little about their expertise on strategic questions, i.e., should we be going to war in the first place or how do we accomplish the reconstruction goals necessary for political reconciliation. Fourth, and I note you did not mention this point, many of these retired officers simply speak on areas outside their expertise. Goldwater-Nichols, mandating increased joint experience for promotion wasn't even passed into law until 1986. The ideas that these retired officers have sufficient experience outside their own narrow service specialities that enable them to make useful and intelligent commentary is not credible Even if what you wrote is exactly so, and I did not specifically cite Gen. Downing as an ideological water boy, pointing to one person does not refute what I wrote.
First, not all, indeed, most of the analysts cited in the NYT article are not retired officers of Gen. Downing’s experience and stature.
Second, it is a fact that one of the best analysts on Iraq is a think tanker, i.e., Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. By the way, his analyses are backed up by numerous, immensely detailed, fact-filled reports, all of which are available on the CSIS website, which is far more than any of the analysts cited int he NYT article have ever drone.
Third, having put on a uniform, and led (hopefully) troops on the battlefield, says remarkably little about their expertise on strategic questions, i.e., should we be going to war in the first place or how do we accomplish the reconstruction goals necessary for political reconciliation.
Fourth, and I note you did not mention this point, many of these retired officers simply speak on areas outside their expertise. Goldwater-Nichols, mandating increased joint experience for promotion wasn’t even passed into law until 1986. The ideas that these retired officers have sufficient experience outside their own narrow service specialities that enable them to make useful and intelligent commentary is not credible

]]> By: Wolfpack SigO http://blog.psaonline.org/2008/04/21/an-officer-and-a-media-shill/comment-page-1/#comment-866819 Wolfpack SigO Tue, 22 Apr 2008 21:38:05 +0000 http://blog.psaonline.org/?p=516#comment-866819 Where do I start? I saw the article on Sunday, and winced a little when they included a picture of Wayne Downing on the front page. General Downing has passed on and can’t exactly defend himself, but if anyone reading this heads to Google and searches for his biography, they’d be hard pressed to refer to him as a “water boy” of any sort. He used his decades of military service to inform policy and further serve his country when he had every right to some easy golf course living. With that, I’d also challenge your contention that a retired general has about the same expertise as the average think tank analyst. Like certain political candidates that think, read, and expound upon how things should be done and which way is best, the average think tank analyst (many of whom never bothered to put on a uniform) can only dream about leading men and women, and repeatedly making decisions that affect thousands of people, much like an experienced legislator or general officer. There’s a world of difference between talking and doing, yes? In the end, the entire story seemed like a device for pointing a finger at someone else for our own bad decision. It’s a little like going souvenir shopping on vacation and being stupid enough to think we could buy an authentic Ming vase in Jamaica. It’s fake, common sense told us it was fake, and we bought it anyway. Don’t blame the peddler. Where do I start? I saw the article on Sunday, and winced a little when they included a picture of Wayne Downing on the front page. General Downing has passed on and can’t exactly defend himself, but if anyone reading this heads to Google and searches for his biography, they’d be hard pressed to refer to him as a “water boy” of any sort. He used his decades of military service to inform policy and further serve his country when he had every right to some easy golf course living.

With that, I’d also challenge your contention that a retired general has about the same expertise as the average think tank analyst. Like certain political candidates that think, read, and expound upon how things should be done and which way is best, the average think tank analyst (many of whom never bothered to put on a uniform) can only dream about leading men and women, and repeatedly making decisions that affect thousands of people, much like an experienced legislator or general officer. There’s a world of difference between talking and doing, yes?

In the end, the entire story seemed like a device for pointing a finger at someone else for our own bad decision. It’s a little like going souvenir shopping on vacation and being stupid enough to think we could buy an authentic Ming vase in Jamaica. It’s fake, common sense told us it was fake, and we bought it anyway. Don’t blame the peddler.

]]>