On the New York Times Eviscerating Bergdahl's Platoon-Mates for Having the Audacity to Dig Trenches in 100 Degree Heat Without Wearing All of Their Gear
Half of them (the New York Times schmucks, I'm saying) had never even seen a shovel before (at least not a literal one).
I posted this earlier on another site, but is appropriate to your statement. I have to laugh at the ‘raggedy’ comment from the press and some ‘unnamed military source’. Soldiers in AFG are able to dress down when working out, sleeping or trying to enjoy a few moments of leisure time…as long as they are able to quickly grab their weapon and kit. Many people may remember the photo of the Soldier in AFG returning fire while his COP was under Taliban attack….while wearing body armor and boxers with hearts on it. I suppose he was raggedy as well. Non-issue.
Additionally, “raggedy” IS a common Army term to describe something substandard, but is nowhere near an official or cogent measure of unit assessment. It’s somebody’s personal opinion. Non-issue.
Finally, the State Department bottle-blonde spokesperson, implying that only Bergdahl ‘knows what happened that night’, and stating that the other members of his platoon don’t…illustrates why politically appointed civilians opinions on military-specific matters, should be discounted on their face.
I probably should have also mentioned (and well said, btw) that the Times put this virulent little hit piece right on the front page. Real classy, huh?
Well, I'm not the biggest proponent of the 'liberal media' theory....but some outlets do seem to take their marching orders from particular Administrations.
""If men do not obey orders in small things, they are incapable of being led in battle," Patton recorded in his diary. "I will have discipline-to do otherwise is to commit murder." So began the "$25 Derby," named for the fines liberally imposed by "Gorgeous Georgie" on those who were found without helmets, including nurses in hospital wards and men in latrines."
The angle here, BB (IMO), is to portray this unit as so bad that is is understandable why a person like Bergdahl would leave it and I find that to be rather shitty journalism.
My take is rather that unit security was a bit lax in that a trooper COULD just walk away, not that its esprit de corps was so poor that one would want to. In hindsight, some members of the unit recalled Bergdahl as acting strangely, asking questions about where to send his personal belongings etc. That said, operating in a combat zone presents more important priorities to worry about. I agree to the extent that quite possibly, he exhibited feelings about the military and its role in theater, but doubt they extended to his particular unit. We are all guessing a bit.
Rusty said: "The NYT is running cover for the White House pure and simple."
As a campaign organ of the Left, this is typical
Note that the campaign finance reform (in the form of government controlling who can run, say what, etc) is favored by the NYT. This is because such regulations, of course, exempt the NYT.
10 comments:
I posted this earlier on another site, but is appropriate to your statement. I have to laugh at the ‘raggedy’ comment from the press and some ‘unnamed military source’. Soldiers in AFG are able to dress down when working out, sleeping or trying to enjoy a few moments of leisure time…as long as they are able to quickly grab their weapon and kit. Many people may remember the photo of the Soldier in AFG returning fire while his COP was under Taliban attack….while wearing body armor and boxers with hearts on it. I suppose he was raggedy as well. Non-issue.
Additionally, “raggedy” IS a common Army term to describe something substandard, but is nowhere near an official or cogent measure of unit assessment. It’s somebody’s personal opinion. Non-issue.
Finally, the State Department bottle-blonde spokesperson, implying that only Bergdahl ‘knows what happened that night’, and stating that the other members of his platoon don’t…illustrates why politically appointed civilians opinions on military-specific matters, should be discounted on their face.
I probably should have also mentioned (and well said, btw) that the Times put this virulent little hit piece right on the front page. Real classy, huh?
Well, I'm not the biggest proponent of the 'liberal media' theory....but some outlets do seem to take their marching orders from particular Administrations.
""If men do not obey orders in small things, they are incapable of being led in battle," Patton recorded in his diary. "I will have discipline-to do otherwise is to commit murder." So began the "$25 Derby," named for the fines liberally imposed by "Gorgeous Georgie" on those who were found without helmets, including nurses in hospital wards and men in latrines."
The angle here, BB (IMO), is to portray this unit as so bad that is is understandable why a person like Bergdahl would leave it and I find that to be rather shitty journalism.
I'm not a big liberal media theory guy, either, CI, but for the NY Times, MSNBC, and the HuffPo I will make an exception.
It's a matter of properly identifying leftist media, which you seem to be doing. And in TV news, leftist media is the rule rather than exception.
My take is rather that unit security was a bit lax in that a trooper COULD just walk away, not that its esprit de corps was so poor that one would want to. In hindsight, some members of the unit recalled Bergdahl as acting
strangely, asking questions about where to send his personal belongings etc. That said, operating in a combat zone presents
more important priorities to worry about. I agree to the extent that quite possibly, he
exhibited feelings about the military and its role in theater, but doubt they extended to his
particular unit. We are all guessing a bit.
The NYT is running cover for the White House pure and simple.
Rusty said: "The NYT is running cover for the White House pure and simple."
As a campaign organ of the Left, this is typical
Note that the campaign finance reform (in the form of government controlling who can run, say what, etc) is favored by the NYT. This is because such regulations, of course, exempt the NYT.
Post a Comment