SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (234733)6/30/2007 3:26:20 PM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 281500
 
But I'm not sure that it's even good journalism to put a operation codename in the title of an article. Isn't it obvious that when you introduce an operational codename people don't know what it is? It's like using an acronym before you spell it out.


So you think the coverage of June 1944 never used the term "D-Day"?

If they had covered that operation like they cover Iraq, they would have spent the entire front page talking about nothing but the horrendous casualties. FDR would have been forced to negotiate a peace. We could still be trying to contain Nazi Germany today.



To: jttmab who wrote (234733)6/30/2007 3:31:23 PM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Nothing on your aggregator about Arrowhead Ripper. Nothing about US military operations in Iraq. If they didn't like using the code term, I would be fine with "Major US Offensive to Destroy Al Qaeda in Baquba" which is what it is.

But gee, that might sound like the US Army is doing something positive, wouldn't it? Can't have that.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News