Comments on: Iwo Jima As Covered by Today’s Media

By: Boyd

Boyd — Tue, 12 Oct 2004 15:09:00 +0000

Apologies for the above digression. I obviously wasn't paying close enough attention to the discussion.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Tue, 12 Oct 2004 15:06:47 +0000

Boyd: True. But it was pretty clear that FDR was going to make Germany the top priority, regardless. We were all but at war with them since the start of Lend Lease, after all.

By: Boyd

Boyd — Tue, 12 Oct 2004 15:04:15 +0000

Although Nazi Germany never attacked the US homeland, it did declare war on the US, and I'm pretty sure it was prior to the US declaring war on Germany.

By: Sister Toldjah

Sister Toldjah — Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:32:07 +0000

Zell strikes again! He’s got a great humorous parody piece in today’s Washington Times .... Wink to Outside the Beltway.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:21:19 +0000

His point, rather obvious from the article I thought, was that the media reports every setback as if it were the end of the world. Had Iwo Jima--or, goodness, D-Day--been treated that way, morale would have been much lower. And, of course, Hitler never attacked the US and was unlikely ever to do so.

By: carpeicthus

carpeicthus — Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:17:13 +0000

Is the media insipid? Yes, but that's low-hanging fruit. Otherwise, if he thinks that America wouldn't want to stike back at Japan after they'd you know, actually attacked us and declared war on us and all that fun stuff, I'm astonished he loathes his countrymen so much.